iii,"'"^' 


mm 

til     111! 


tlilliiiilil! 


I'l  ! 


Hllllllii 


\  !!ii  m^ 


mm 


liiiiii 


LIBRARY 

OF   THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA. 


Class 


l.£Ht.rii\ 


t^ 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2008  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/ethnictrinitiestOOpainrich 


ILebt  lleonarD  i^aine,  2E>*  W>* 


A  CRITICAL  HISTORY  OF  THE  EVOLUTION  OF 
TRINITARIANISM  AND  ITS  OUTCOME  IN  THE 
NEW  CHRISTOLOGY.    Crown  8vo,  $2.00. 

ETHNIC  TRINITIES  AND  THEIR  RELATION  TO 
THE  CHRISTIAN  TRINITY.  Crown  8vo,  $1.75 
nei. 

HOUGHTON,  MIFFLIN  &  CO. 
Boston  and  New  York. 


THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

AND  THEIR  RELATIONS  TO  THE 
CHRISTIAN  TRINITY 


A  CHAPTER  IN  THE 


Comparative  l^i^tor^  of  Heligionsi 


BY 


LEVI  LEONARD  PAINE 

WALDO  FBOrSSSOB  OF  ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTOBY  IN  BAKOOB 
THEOLOOICAL  SEMIKABT 


.**  The  true  criticism  of  Dogma  is  its  history  " 
David  Fbibdbich  Stbauss 


BOSTON  AND  NEW  YORK 

HOUGHTON,  MIFFLIN  AND  COMPANY 

^l^e  KlitierjjiDe  ptt^^,  ^Tamlinbge 

1901 


T3 


COPYRIGHT,  I90I,  BY  LEVI  LEONARD  PAINS 
ALL  RIGHTS  RESERVED 

Published  September,  igoi 


GENERAL 


TO 
YALE  UNIVERSITY 

MY  ALMA  MATER 

WHOSE    FREE    AND    TOLERANT    SPIRIT    TOOK    FULL 

POSSESSION  OF  ME  IN  MY  COLLEGE  DATS,  AND 

HAS  CONTINUED  TO  BE  THE  SPRING  OP 

MY  INTELLECTUAL  LIFE 

AND   TO 

PROFESSOR  GEORGE  P.  FISHER 

DEAN  OF  YALE  DIVINITY  SCHOOL 

WHO    SO   ADMIRABLY   ILLUSTRATES   IN   HIS   LIFE  AND 

WRITINCJS  THE  CHARACTER  OF  THE  INSTITUTION 

WHICH  HE  ADORNS,  THIS  LATEST  FRUIT 

OF   MY   HISTORICAL   STUDIES 

IS  DEDICATED 


101S37 


PEEFACE 

The  comparative  history  of  religions  is  the 
latest  and  most  productive  field  of  investigation 
and  discovery  that  historical  science  has  opened. 
The  field  as  a  whole  is  vast  in  extent  and  complex 
and  intricate  in  its  character.  This  book  deals 
with  a  single  chapter  of  it.  I  was  led  to  the  study 
of  the  Ethnic  trinities  by  my  previous  studies  in 
the  historical  evolution  of  the  Christian  trinity,  — 
finding  as  I  did  that  Christian  trinitarianism  is 
only  a  part  of  a  world-wide  historical  evolution 
that  goes  back  to  the  very  origins  of  religion  itself. 
Thus,  while  the  present  volume  is  an  entirely 
fresh  and  independent  work,  it  may  properly  be 
regarded  as  a  companion  of  my  previous  book: 
"  A  Critical  History  of  the  Evolution  of  Trinita- 
rianism, and  its  Outcome  in  the  New  Christology." 
Its  object  is  to  carry  the  history  of  trinitarianism 
back  of  its  later  Christian  form  of  development, 
and  trace  its  primary  sources  as  well  as  its  histor- 
ical evolution  through  the  various  Ethnic  trinities 
until  it  enters  its  Christian  stage,  and  then  to 
compare  with  each  other  these  different  stages  of 


7i  PREFACE 

religious  thought  and  draw  from  such  comparison 
its  historical  conclusions. 

It  may  be  made  a  point  of  criticism  by  some  of 
my  readers  that  I  have  entered  so  deeply  and  fully 
into  the  philosophical  development  of  Greek  trin- 
itarian  thought ;  but  my  apology  is  that  an  accu- 
rate knowledge  of  New  Platonism,  and  above  all 
of  Plotinus,  is  absolutely  essential  to  the  under- 
standing of  Christian  mediaeval  philosophy  and 
theology,  and  of  the  modern  ideas  that  have  been 
evolved  from  them.  Scholars  are  coming  to  real- 
ize —  what  until  recently  has  been  little  appre- 
ciated —  that  Plotinus  was  the  most  original  and 
acute  philosophical  thinker  since  Plato  and  Aris- 
totle, and  that  his  influence  to-day  has  eclipsed 
that  of  his  great  masters.  In  fact,  the  Plotinian 
pantheistic  monism  is  increasingly  regnant  in  mod- 
ern philosophy,  not  to  say  in  Christian  theology. 
It  may  be  said  that  not  a  few  of  the  historical  and 
metaphysical  blunders  that  have  had  vogue  in 
past  histories  of  Christian  doctrine  have  arisen 
from  ignorance  of  those  later  transformations  of 
Platonism  which  are  so  clearly  set  forth  in  the 
speculations  of  Plotinus. 

While  I  have  restricted  myself  to  a  single  phase 
of  the  general  history  of  religions,  it  should  be 
borne  in  mind  that  the  evolution  of  the  idea  of 
God  is  central  to  all  religious  thought,  and  con- 


PREFACE 


vu 


sequently  that  the  subject-matter  of  this  book  will 
be  found  to  include  more  or  less  directly  many  of 
the  fundamental  problems  of  theology.  Like  the 
earlier  volume  it  is  purely  historical  and  critical, 
not  dogmatic,  resting  entirely  on  the  scientific 
inductive  method ;  and  it  wiU,  I  believe,  furnish  a 
new  illustration  of  the  truth  of  Strauss's  words, 
.  adopted  as  a  motto  on  the  title-page :  "  The  true 
criticism  of  dogma  is  its  history." 

If  there  are  any  who  have  been  indisposed  to 
accept  the  statements  and  conclusions  of  my  previ- 
ous book,  I  cannot  doubt  that  the  perusal  of  this 
one  will  overcome  such  indisposition,  unless  indeed 
their  minds  are  proof  against  all  purely  historical 
evidence  ;  while  to  those  who  are  ready  to  accept 
the  divine  revelations  that  are  given  in  nature  and 
history  this  new  volume  will,  I  am  sure,  bring  new 
satisfaction.  They  will  learn  more  fully  perhaps 
than  ever  before  that  the  world  as  a  whole,  not 
only  in  the  reahn  of  nature  and  natural  law,  but 
also  in  the  history  of  man  as  a  religious  being,  is 
full  of  divinity  and  of  the  proofs  of  a  divine  move- 
ment of  love,  and  so  will  be  able  to  read  with  a 
new  sense  of  their  profound  meaning  Browning's 
lines:  — 

"  The  earth  is  crammed  with  heaven 

And  every  common  bush  afire  with  GJod.'* 

LEVI  L.  PAINE. 

Banoob,  Me.,  April,  1901. 


CONTENTS 

PART  I 

THE    ETHNIC    TRINITIES 

Chap.  Pacw 

I.  Preliminaky  Survey 3 

II.  Special   Causes   of  the    Rise   of  the  Ethnic 

Trinities 14 

^  m.  General   Character   and   Relations   of   the 

""^               Ethnic  Trinities 31 

IV.  The  Hindoo  Brahmanic  Trinity         ...  37 

1^,  V.  The  Persian  Zoroastrian  Trinitarianism    .  64 

^  VI.  The  Greek  Homeric  Trinity       ....  92 
VII.   The  Evolution  of  the  Greek  Philosophical 

Trinitarianism 124 

~   VIIL  The  Greek  Plotinian  Trinity    ....  162 


PART  II 

THE     RELATIONS     OF    THE     ETHNIC    TRINITIES     TO     THE 
CHRISTIAN   TRINITY 

I.  The  External  or  Historical  Relations       .        191 
II.  The  Internal  Relations  —  Resemblances       .    219 
III.  The  Internal  Relations  —  Differences      .        270 
rV.  The  Providential  Mission  of  Christianity  as 

A  World-Religion 281 

V.  The  Unreadiness  of  Christendom  for  the  Ful- 
fillment OF  ITS  Mission        ....        291 
VI.  Two    Perils    of    Organized    Christianity  —  I. 

Ignorance 299 

VII.  Two   Perils   of  Organized  Christianity  —  II. 

Insincerity 306 

VIII.  The  New  Problem  of  Theology  in  the  Twen- 
tieth Century 340 

Index 371 


PART  I 
THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 


"  Though  all  the  -winds  of  doctrine  were  let  loose  to  play  upon 
the  earth,  so  truth  be  in  the  field,  we  do  injuriously  by  licensing 
and  prohibiting  to  misdoubt  her  strength.  Let  her  and  falsehood 
grapple ;  who  ever  knew  truth  put  to  the  worse  in  a  free  and 
open  encounter  ?  Her  confuting  is  the  best  and  surest  suppress- 
ing. He  who  hears  what  praying  there  is  for  light  and  clear 
knowledge  to  be  sent  down  among  us  would  think  of  other  mat- 
ters to  be  constituted  beyond  the  discipline  of  Geneva,  framed 
and  f  abricked  already  to  our  hands.  Yet  when  the  new  light  which 
we  beg  for  shines  in  upon  us,  there  be  who  envy  and  oppose,  if  it 
come  not  first  in  at  their  casements.  What  a  collusion  is  this, 
when  as  we  are  exhorted  by  the  wise  man  to  use  diligence  "  to 
seek  for  wisdom  as  for  hidden  treasures"  early  and  late,  that 
another  order  shall  enjoin  us  to  know  nothing  but  by  statute  ? 
When  a  man  hath  been  laboring  the  hardest  labor  in  the  deep 
mines  of  knowledge,  hath  furnished  out  his  findings  in  all  their 
equipage,  drawn  forth  his  reasons  as  it  were  a  battle  ranged,  scat- 
tered and  defeated  all  objections  in  his  way,  calls  out  his  adver- 
sary into  the  plain,  offers  him  the  advantage  of  wind  and  sun,  if  he 
please,  only  that  he  may  try  the  matter  by  dint  of  argument ;  for 
his  opponents  then  to  skulk,  to  lay  ambushments,  to  keep  a  nar- 
row bridge  of  licensing  where  the  challenger  should  pass,  though 
it  be  valor  enough  in  soldiership,  is  but  weakness  and  cowardice 
in  the  wars  of  truth." — John  Milton. 


CHAPTER  I 

PRELIMINARY   SURVEY 

This  book  proposes  a  comparative  study  of  the 
Ethnic  and  Christian  trinities.  Recent  investiga- 
tions in  the  history  of  religions  have  given  a  new- 
aspect  to  this  subject,  aud  have  entirely  changed 
the  view  to  be  taken  of  the  historical  relation  of 
the  Christian  ideas  of  God  and  those  of  other 
religions,  and  especially  of  the  trinitarian  doctrine 
of  God  as  existing  in  a  trinity  of  persons  or  of  per- 
sonal forms.  This  change  has  been  brought  about 
in  two  ways.  In  the  first  place,  scientific  and  his- 
torical studies  have  developed  new  conceptions  of 
the  unity  that  imderlies  phenomena  and  events, 
of  the  universality  of  law,  and  of  the  evolution  of 
aU  things  along  the  lines  of  natural  and  moral 
causes.  This  principle  of  evolution  first  became 
evident  in  the  processes  of  the  physical  world,  and 
has  been  adopted  as  a  cardinal  axiom  of  science ; 
but  it  has  been  proved  to  be  equally  a  fundamen- 
tal force  in  aU.  historical  events.  A  historical  evo- 
lution according  to  fixed  historical  laws  is  as  surely 
working  in  human  affairs  as  a  natural  evolution 
is  working  in  all  the  movements  of  the  material 
universe.     An  essential  difference,  however,  is  to 


4  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

be  noted  between  physical  and  historical  evolution. 
The  latter  is  moral,  involving  the  element  of  hu- 
man free  agency,  with  its  consequent  variability 
of  human  action,  while  the  former  is  under  strict 
physical  law,  and  so  fixed  and  invariable.  But  the 
moral  kingdom  is  as  truly  one  of  law  and  evolution 
as  the  natural.  The  power  of  free  will  is  not  a 
mere  erratic  and  unaccountable  form  of  activity ; 
it  has  its  own  mysterious  laws,  and  these  laws 
work  in  harmony  with  all  the  laws  of  the  imiverse, 
and  play  their  proper  part  in  the  grand  evolution 
of  the  world's  history.  For  it  must  be  recognized 
at  once  that  all  recent  scientific  discoveries  tend 
towards  a  single  result,  namely,  that  one  ultimate 
law  of  life  and  movement  includes  every  form  of 
existence,  and  produces  one  system  of  things  which 
we  call  the  universe.  The  old  Platonic  idea  that 
this  cosmos  in  which  man  has  his  place  is  an  ani- 
mal with  a  world-soul  contains  an  element  of 
scientific  truth.  The  universe  is  one  living  organic 
whole,  under  the  guidance  of  one  active  force  or 
combination  of  forces,  and  all  individual  living 
things  are  held  within  its  eternal  sway.  What  is 
called  the  law  of  natural  evolution  is  simply  the 
last  word  and  summary  of  all  the  scientific  laws 
and  principles  that  aU  recent  investigations,  from 
Copernicus,  Kepler,  and  Newton,  down  to  the 
latest  discoveries  of  the  present  day,  have  brought 
to  light.  That  law,  in  the  very  nature  of  things, 
can  allow  no  exception.  To  break  it  once  is  to 
break  it  up  forever,  and  dissolve  the  order  of  the 


PRELIMINARY  SURVEY  5 

world.  Evolution  is  a  process,  the  result  of  life, 
and  so  long  as  there  is  life,  so  long  will  it  work 
according  to  the  divine  laws  of  its  own  nature  in  a 
ceaseless  progress  towards  its  highest  ends.  Man 
is  mysteriously  included  in  this  great  world  system, 
and  so  we  must  expect  that  the  law  of  evolution 
wiU  reveal  itself  in  human  history  as  well  as  in 
physical  science,  and  hence  it  is  that  what  is  called 
the  scientific  and  inductive  method  of  study  and 
investigation  is  also  the  method  of  the  true  histo- 
rian. 

This  universal  evolutionary  law  or  principle 
finds  special  illustration  in  the  history  of  the 
world's  religions.  Comparative  religion  —  almost 
the  youngest  of  the  sciences,  and  which  is  destined 
to  revolutionize  theology  and  philosophy  in  many 
points,  shedding  new  light  as  it  does  on  the  origin 
and  wide  prevalence  of  ideas  and  beliefs  supposed 
to  be  unique,  and  the  possession  of  a  few  favored 
men — gives  conclusive  proof  of  the  fact  that  all 
f  the  religions  of  mankind  have  been  the  result  of  a 
plow  and  wide  development  under  a  law  of  evolu- 
/tion  that  is  universal  in  its  range.  To  this  law 
"Christianity,  as  a  system  of  religious  beliefs  and 
dogmas,  forms  no  exception.  Every  article  of  the 
Christian  creed  is  the  full  flower  of  a  long  histori- 
cal evolution.  The  dogma  of  the  trinity  is  a  con- 
spicuous example.  Whatever  be  the  truth  as  to 
the  mode  of  the  Divine  Being,  whether  he  really 
exists  in  personal  unity,  or  in  personal  trinity,  or 
is  pluralized  in  aU  the  gods  of  heathen  polytheism, 


6  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

it  is  a  historical  fact  which  caanot  be  gainsaid,  that 
the  Christian  trinitarian  dogma  as  set  forth  in 
the  Nicene  Creed  was  the  slow  growth  of  centu- 
ries, starting  from  a  single  new  point  of  religious 
belief,  and  unfolding  itself  step  by  step  through 
successive  accretions  of  religious  thought  gathered 
from  various  historical  sources,  passing  from  unity 
to  duality,  and  from  duality  to  truiity,  then  mov- 
ing on  from  a  lower  inchoate  trinitarian  stage  to 
one  higher  and  more  complete,  until  out  of  contro- 
versy and  schism  tt^^  full  Nicene  homoousian  doc- 
trine was  reached.  /  Thus  the  Christian  dogma  of 
the  trinity  as  a  historical  evolution  is  to  be  classed 
with  the  other  trinities  of  the  Ethnic  religions, 
and  should  be  studied  with  them,  as  together  form- 
ing a  siQgle  chapter  in  the  comparative  history  of 
religions^ 

This  new  scientific  view  of  the  historical  relation 
of  the  Ethnic  and  Christian  trinities  has  been 
amply  sustained  and  illustrated  by  the  recent  his- 
torical discoveries  in  the  field  of  the  Ethnic  reli- 
gions. That  some  of  these  religions  contained 
divine  triads  had  been  a  recognized  isuct  of  long 
standing ;  but  its  real  significance  was  not  appre- 
ciated, and  a  scientific  and  critical  study  of  the 
trinitarian  elements  and  an  estimate  of  their 
relation  to  the  Christian  trinity  had  never  been  at- 
tempted. The  new  researches,  however,  go  much 
farther,  xhey  reveal  triaities  of  varied  forms  and 
developments  in  almost  all  the  Ethnic  religions. 
Such  trinities  are  found  in  the  theogonies  of  the 


PRELIMINARY  SURVEY  7 

Egyptians,  the  Chaldaeans,  the  Babylonians,  the  As- 
syrians, the  Hindoos,  the  Gaulish-Celts,  the  Teu- 
tonic-Scandinavians, the  Greeks  and  Romans,  the 
Phrygians,  the  Persians,  the  Chinese,  the  Ameri- 
can tribes,  Hawaiians,  Polynesians.  That  trinities 
should  be  so  widely  spread  among  the  different 
peoples  and  races  of  the  world  is  certainly  a  fact 
of  great  religious  significance,  and  a  historical 
study  of  these  trinities  should  yield  some  fruitful 
religious  and  theological  lessons.X,  Such  a  study  is 
especially  needful  in  view  of  the  fact  that  Chris- 
tian traditional  theology  is  founded  upon  assump- 
tions that  are  entirely  at  variance  with  the  results 
of  the  new  science  of  comparative  religion,  partic- 
ularly in  the  field  of  historical  evolution.  These 
assumptions  are  centred  in  the  idea  that  God 
made  a  special,  supernatural  revelation  of  himself 
and  of  his  mode  of  existence  to  the  first  progeni- 
tors of  the  race.  Monotheism,  or  the  doctrine  of 
one  God,  was  supposed  to  be  a  part  of  that  prime- 
val revelation.  Polytheism  was  regarded  as  a 
perversion  of  the  original  faith,  brought  about  by 
human  sin  and  depravity  which  darkened  the  un- 
derstanding and  corrupted  the  will.  This  doctrine 
of  the  fall  and  original  sinfulness  of  the  race  was 
based  on  the  acceptance  of  the  account  in  Genesis 
of  the  temptation  of  Adam  and  Eve  by  the  ser- 
pent as  historical  truth.  Paul  became  the  most 
influential  expounder  of  it.  He  was  a  true  Jew, 
and  accepted  the  traditional  Rabbinical  theory  of 
the   plenary   inspiration   of   the    Old   Testament 


8  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

Scriptures.  Hence  his  philosophy  of  heathenism, 
namely,  that  sinful  and  fallen  men  "  did  not  like 
to  retain  God  in  their  knowledge,"  so  that  God 
gave  them  over  to  the  delusions  of  polytheism  and 
idolatry.  But  these  views  of  Paul,  which  have 
been  so  influential  with  later  Christian  theologians, 
have  no  historical  basis.  It  is  a  piece  of  Jewish 
traditionalism  which  the  Jewish  convert,  Paul, 
carried  with  him  into  the  Christian  church.  Mono- 
theism, so  far  from  being  the  earliest  doctrine  of 
God,  is  a  late  development  of  human  thought.  It 
involves  a  long  process  of  analysis  and  synthesis 
in  the  observation  and  investigation  of  the  external 
world.  In  the  beginnings  of  human  experience 
man  saw  only  particular  phenomena.  The  unity 
of  nature  was  unperceived.  The  world  was  filled 
with  separate  causalities  and  agencies.  The  idea 
of  a  first  cause  behind  aU  the  original  activities 
of  nature  was  a  flight  of  reflective  thought  to 
which  those  first  children  of  the  race  were  utterly 
unequal.  Polytheism  was  the  natural  and  spon- 
taneous religion  of  the  primeval  world.  The  sen- 
tence, "  In  the  beginning  God  created  the  heavens 
and  the  earth,"  —  a  statement  that  seems  so 
ancient  to  us,  as  we  read  it  in  the  first  chapter  of 
Genesis,  —  is  in  reality  modem,  when  seen  in  its 
true  historical  place  in  the  long  evolution  of  man's 
ideas  of  God.  The  writer  of  that  sentence  had 
behind  him  many  centuries  of  Hebrew  thought 
and  faith,  and  behind  the  oldest  Hebrew  was  his 
Chaldaean  ancestor,  with  his  polytheistic  creation 


PRELIMINARY  SURVEY  9 

myth  left  on  record  for  us,  fortunately,  in  the  re- 
surrected clay  tablets  of  Nineveh.  I  have  spoken 
of  the  earliest  members  of  our  race  as  children. 
Such  indeed  they  were.  Their  gaze  upon  the  outer 
world  around  them  was  like  that  of  the  rustic  in 
Pollock's  "  Course  of  Time  "  who  — 

"  Thought  the  visual  line  that  girt  him  round, 
The  world's  extreme  ;  and  thought  the  silver  moon. 
That  nightly  o'er  him  led  her  virgin  host. 
No  broader  than  his  father's  shield." 

In  that  primeval  time  the  imagination  was  the 
chief  interpreter  to  man  of  nature  and  its  powers. 
It  was  man's  religious  imagination  that  turned 
the  sun  into  a  god,  and  filled  sky,  air,  earth,  and 
sea  with  multitudinous  divine  beings.  With  the 
development  of  the  reflective  and  rational  faculties 
man  began  to  read  in  nature  the  signs  of  order, 
law,  and  unity.  Then  followed  the  tendency  to 
find  a  headship  among  the  various  divinities  of  the 
vast  polytheistic  pantheon.  Here  the  trinitarian 
idea,  which  so  many  analogies  and  indications  of 
tripleness  in  nature  and  man  had  suggested,  came 
in  to  help.  Trinities  became  the  superior  gods, 
and  this  step  became  a  half-way  house  to  another, 
namely,  the  idea  of  a  first  god  among  the  three, 
like  Brahma  in  the  Hindoo  trimurti,  Zeus  among 
the  Greeks,  and  Jupiter  among  the  Komans.  But 
monotheism  was  not  easily  made  congenial  to  the 
polytheistic  mind,  and  remained  the  idea  of  the 
cultured  and  philosophic  few.  The  trinitarian 
conception,  however,  was  more  easily  accepted.    It 


10  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

satisfied  the  sense  of  plurality,  and  also  met  in  a 
degree  the  need  of  a  higher  unity.  It  was  at  this 
trinitarian  stage  of  polytheistic  limitation  that  the 
Ethnic  religions  mostly  stopped.  Only  in  several 
of  the  Ethnic  philosophies,  as  they  should  be 
rather  called  in  distinction  from  the  popular  reli- 
gions that  were  based  upon  them,  was  a  theistic  or 
pantheistic  unitarianism  reached.  That  such  a 
trinitarian  half-way  house  should  have  been  erected 
between  the  most  unrestricted  polytheism  and  the 
most  abstract  unitarianism,  and  have  remained  as 
the  traditional  abiding-place  of  Ethnic  religions, 
is  seen  to  be  most  natural,  when  we  note  how 
easily  Christian  theologians  were  led  to  use  this 
device  as  a  support  of  their  own  trinitarian  doc- 
trine. The  Christian  trinity  was  held  up  in  early 
Christian  apologies  as  the  golden  mean  between  a 
crude  heathen  polytheism,  on  the  one  hand,  and 
a  stark  Jewish  monotheism,  on  the  other.  Even 
modern  apologists  have  employed  the  same  device. 
So  astute  and  accomplished  a  theologian  as  Henry 
B.  Smith  declares  that  the  old  Biblical  and  Pla- 
tonic theistic  doctrine  of  God  as  a  uni-personal 
being  is  in  fact  a  form  of  deism,  and  he  substitutes 
for  it  a  trinitarian  theism  of  his  own,  namely,  that 
God  exists  as  an  absolute  uni-personality,  while  not 
uni-personal  but  tri-personal,  —  a  form  of  doctrine 
which  seems  to  me  utterly  self-destructive,  and  is 
a  strange  theism  indeed. 

The  trinitarian  idea  has  a  similar  relation  to 
the  pantheistic  philosophies  which  were  developed 


I 


PRELIMINARY  SURVEY  11 

out  of  the  original  polytheistic  religions.  These 
philosophies  sought  to  bring  the  popular  polythe- 
ism into  harmonious  relation  with  the  metaphysi- 
cal conception  of  a  divine  unity.  This  was  accom- 
plished by  an  evolution  theory  according  to  which 
one  primal  being  became  the  original  cause  of  all 
multiform  existence.  All  individual  gods  were 
mere  emanations  from  a  single  monad,  —  different 
modifications  of  one  divine  Being.  This  logical 
rather  than  scientific  evolution  —  for  it  had  no  sci- 
entific basis  —  started  from  a  speculative  unity, 
but  made  no  further  use  of  it,  except  as  a  tran- 
scendental background  for  the  trinitarian  stage  to 
which  it  moved  at  once,  and  which  was  made  the 
real  ttov  o-tw  or  centre  of  the  whole  system.  Why 
the  triads  should  have  had  so  prominent  a  place 
in  this  pantheistic  theory  is  not  very  clear,  since  it 
was  only  a  single  step  in  a  descending  series.  Yet 
in  fact  the  trinities  of  the  pantheistic  philosophies 
are  the  most  definite  and  fixed  of  all  the  Ethnic 
trinities,  and  in  them  the  line  of  division  is  sharply 
drawn  between  the  gods  who  form  these  trinities 
and  the  other  numerous  gods  who  complete  the 
evolution.  This  is  the  case  with  the  Hindoo  trin- 
ity, Brahma,  Vishnu,  Civa,  and  stiU  more  clearly 
with  the  New  Platonic  or  Plotinian  "  three  hypos- 
tases,"   TO  eVf  6  vovs,  rj  ^v\y. 

We  have  thus  seen  that  monotheism,  histori- 
cally considered,  is  the  end  of  an  ascending  series 
of  beliefs  concerning  God,  rather  than  the  be- 
ginning of  a  descending  series,  and  that  history 
inverts  the  traditional  view. 


12  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

The  same  result  is  reached  in  that  modification 
of  monotheism  which  is  found  in  the  Christian 
dogma  of  the  trinity.  This  dogma  has  also  been 
traditionally  held  to  be  a  part  of  the  original  reve- 
lation of  God  to  the  race.  It  was  supposed  to  be 
found  in  the  Old  Testament.  Christ  was  believed 
to  have  taught  the  elements  of  it  in  his  interpreta- 
tions of  the  Scriptures  concerning  himself.  Au- 
gustine held  that  the  first  verses  of  Genesis  con- 
tained a  trinitarian  reference.  This  idea  likewise 
is  without  historical  foundation.  The  Ethnic  trin- 
ities are  a  comparatively  late  development  in  the 
history  of  religious  thought  when  viewed  from  the 
side  of  the  remote  past,  though  ancient  when  looked 
at  from  the  standpoint  of  later  historical  times. 
It  is  to  be  remembered  that  the  prehistoric  ages 
cover  by  far  the  longest  period  in  the  vast  process 
of  the  life  of  the  world.  All  authentic  history  is 
but  a  modern  chapter  of  the  earth's  annals  as  a 
whole.  As  to  the  Old  Testament,  it  contains  the 
history  of  a  vigorous  and  radical  reaction  from  the 
Ethnic  polytheism  to  monotheism,  and  its  strong 
insistence  on  the  doctrine  of  one  God  made  the 
development  of  the  trinitarian  dogma  impossible. 
The  Christian  trinity  was  historically  a  new  devel- 
opment out  of  Jewish  monotheism,  in  consequence 
of  the  doctrine  that  grew  about  the  person  of  Jesus 
Christ,  though  it  obtained  the  materials  from 
which  it  was  formed  from  earlier  Greek  philo- 
sophical thought.  It  is  also  to  be  noted  that  the 
Ethnic  trinities  as  well  as  the  Christian  exhibit 


PRELIMINARY  SURVEY  13 

long  and  definite  stages  in  their  evolution.  The 
most  complete  trinities  are  of  late  date.  The 
Hindoo  trimurti  did  not  reach  its  final  stage  till 
the  fifth  or  sixth  century  of  our  era,  though  its 
origin  dates  from  pre-Christian  times.  The  Plo- 
tinian  New  Platonic  trinity,  the  most  perfect  trin- 
ity as  a  speculative  metaphysical  theory  that  has 
ever  been  conceived,  belongs  to  the  third  century 
A.  D.  So  the  Christian  trinity  required  four  cen- 
turies for  its  complete  development  in  the  Nicene 
and  pseudo-Athanasian  creeds. 


CHAPTER  II 

SPECIAL   CAUSES   OF   THE   RISE   OF    THE   ETHNIC 
TRINITIES 

From  this  preliminary  survey  we  pass  to  a 
closer  investigation  of  the  historical  origin  and 
character  of  the  Ethnic  trinities.  Their  origin  is 
hid  in  the  obscurity  of  the  prehistoric  ages.  When 
the  Ethnic  religions  first  appear  under  clear  his- 
torical light  they  are  already  polytheistic,  and  the 
trinitarian  feature  is  more  or  less  fully  developed. 
In  the  latest  authoritative  book  i  on  the  Babylo- 
nian religion  and  mythology,  it  is  stated  that  "  we 
can  thus  trace  back  the  existence  of  this  great 
triad  of  gods  (Anu,  Bel,  and  Ea)  to  the  very 
beginning  of  history."  This  is  equally  true  of 
the  Egyptian  and  the  Hindoo  trinities.  Thus  an 
investigation  of  the  causes  that  led  to  their  devel- 
opment must  be  conducted  with  such  side  lights  as 
are  afforded  us  from  early  man's  religious  nature 
and  environment  and  from  the  forms  into  which 
these  trinities  were  moulded.  The  radical  ques- 
tion is,  why  a  trinity  of  gods,  or  a  triune  god, 
rather  than  a  duad  or  a  quaternity  of  gods,  or 
a  duo-une  or  quadrune  god?     Certainly  there  is 

1  See  Books  on  Egypt  and  Chaldea^  vol.  iv.  1899,  by  Budge  and 
King,  of  the  British  Museum. 


THE  RISE  OF  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES     15 

nothing  peculiar  in  the  number  three  to  dis- 
tinguish it  from  the  other  numerals.  A  triangle 
is  no  more  remarkable  as  a  geometrical  figure  than 
a  square  or  a  pentagon.  Why,  then,  should  three 
have  become  the  sacred  number  of  deity?  The 
question  might  here  be  raised  whether  after  all 
trinity  was  so  eminent  in  the  Ethnic  religions, 
whether  in  fact  too  much  has  not  been  made  of  the 
triads  that  have  been  found.  It  is  true  that 
the  Ethnic  polytheism  allowed  a  considerable  lati- 
tude to  its  trinitarianism.  There  were  changes 
from  one  triad  of  gods  to  another,  also  duplicates 
of  triads,  and  in  the  Egyptian  religion  there  are 
counted  eleven  triads.  Professor  Rawlinson  finds 
a  quatemity  of  gods  in  some  districts.  But  these 
exceptional  cases  only  prove  and  emphasize  the 
rule,  and  Bishop  Westcott's  avowal  in  his  book  on 
"  The  Symbolism  of  Numbers "  is  substantially 
true :  "  It  is  impossible  to  study  any  system  of 
worship  throughout  the  world  without  being  struck 
with  the  peculiar  persistence  of  the  triple  number 
in  regard  to  Divinity."  Three,  then,  was  some- 
how held  among  the  early  races  of  mankind  to  be 
a  peculiarly  sacred  number,  and  as  such  especially 
appropriate  to  deity. 

That  certain  numbers  have  peculiar  sacredness 
was  a  very  early  tradition.  Such  were  seven,  ten, 
as  well  as  three.  It  was  an  ancient  idea  that 
numbers  had  a  deep  and  fundamental  significance. 
Pythagoras,  the  most  famous  and  venerated  name 
in  early  Greek  philosophy,  built  his  whole  system 


16  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

of  the  origin  of  the  universe  on  numbers,  finding 
in  them  the  first  principles  of  order  and  beauty 
and  law.  The  peculiar  sacredness  of  seven  was 
emphasized  in  Hebrew  tradition  and  especially 
recognized  by  the  Mosaic  laws,  but  was  by  no 
means  limited  to  that  people.  Christianity  ac- 
cepted the  Old  Testament  idea,  and  the  Koman 
Cathohc  Church  has  perpetuated  it  in  its  seven 
sacraments,  seven  mortal  sins,  etc.  It  was  a  Py- 
thagorean idea  that  odd  numbers  are  more  pro- 
pitious than  even  numbers,  and  this  superstition 
has  taken  deep  hold  on  men.  The  elder  Pliny 
declares :  "  Odd  numbers  have  more  power  than 
even  ones."  Virgil,  in  one  of  his  Eclogues,  sings : 
"  God  takes  delight  in  odd  numbers."  The  Eo- 
mans  were  very  superstitious  about  unlucky  even 
days  of  the  months.  How  far  this  explains  the 
early  sacredness  attached  to  three  cannot  be  known. 
But  Plutarch  tells  us  that  "The  Eomans  were 
very  careful  in  their  curses  to  repeat  them  three 
times,  —  three  being  with  them  a  mystic  num- 
ber." 

There  is  a  remarkable  passage  in  Aristotle  ("  De 
Ccelo,"  i.  1)  in  which  he  distinguishes  line,  plane, 
and  body  as  having  magnitude  in  one,  two,  and 
three  directions.  "  Since  body  has  magnitude  in 
three  directions,  it  has  magnitude  in  all  directions  : 
hence  three  equals  all,  or  is  the  complete  or  per- 
fect number."  He  quotes  the  Pythagoreans  to 
the  eifect  that  everything  is  marked  off  by  threes : 
"The  end,  the  middle,  and  the  beginning  have 


THE  RISE  OF  THE  ETHNIC   TRINITIES     17 

the  number  of  the  whole  and  are  a  triad."  Hence 
he  adds :  "  Therefore,  having  received  from  nature 
as  it  were  laws  of  it  (^.  e.  the  triad),  we  also  em- 
ploy this  number  (three)  for  the  holy  rites  of  the 
gods.  Moreover,  we  apply  predicates  of  common 
terms  in  the  same  manner.  For  we  call  the  term 
'  two,'  or  '  the  two,'  '  both,'  but  we  do  not  style 
them  '  all.'  But  concerning  '  the  three,'  we  first 
use  this  expression  (all),  and  these  forms  of  lan- 
guage, as  has  been  said,  we  follow  because  nature 
herself  thus  leads  the  way.^^  This  curious  passage 
plainly  indicates  that  Aristotle  found  or  thought 
he  found  the  number  three  to  contain  a  unique 
feature  or  principle  of  nature.  The  universe,  he 
conceived,  is  based  on  the  principle  of  "  the  triad." 
It  is  interesting  to  note  how  Aristotle  connected 
the  laws  of  nature  with  those  of  religion  and  the 
gods.  The  rites  of  religion  in  his  day  had  appar- 
ently some  trinitarian  features  which  he  regarded 
as  somehow  connected  with  the  trinitarian  char- 
acter of  nature  itself.  Aristotle  does  not  pursue 
this  point  farther,  but  plainly  he  started  a  line  of 
speculative  thought  which  would  have  logically  led 
him  to  a  trinitarian  conception  of  God  himself. 
There  is  no  trinitarian  element  in  Aristotle's  philo- 
sophy, except  so  far  as  it  may  be  drawn  from  the 
general  principles  of  Platonism,  which  he  accepted ; 
where,  as  we  shall  see  farther  on,  a  trinitarian 
principle  lurks.  But  plainly  Aristotle  must  have 
been  struck  with  the  evidences  which  nature 
seemed  to  afford  of  a  triadal  character  in  the  con- 


18  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

stitution  of  things.  Too  much,  indeed,  should  not 
be  made  of  this  passage,  which  occurs,  not  in  a 
philosophical  work,  but  in  a  treatise  of  physics. 

Aristotle,  on  the  whole,  cannot  be  counted  as  in 
any  sense  a  religious  trinitarian.  He  held  to  the 
unity  of  God,  whether  theistically  or  pantheisti- 
cally  is  not  quite  clear.  His  testimony,  therefore, 
is  the  more  remarkable,  and  helps  us  to  understand 
how  the  ancient  world  should  have  singled  out 
tTiree  as  a  number  of  peculiar  sacredness.  The 
indications  of  a  natural  and  divine  constitution 
which  Aristotle  discerned  in  the  triple  characteris- 
tics of  external  things  may  also  be  found  in  the  hu- 
man soul  and  in  its  laws  of  thought  and  reasoning. 
Psychology  finds  a  tripartite  division  clearly  distin- 
guishable in  the  soul.  The  functions  of  the  intel- 
lect, the  sensibilities,  and  the  will  are  quite  diverse. 
Yet  the  soul  is  one,  with  a  single  self-consciousness. 
So,  also,  the  logical  reason  works  in  a  threefold 
way.  AU  thought  in  its  development  involves 
thesis,  antithesis,  and  synthesis.  The  Aristotelian 
syllogism,  which  expresses  the  law  of  all  logical 
mental  processes,  consists  of  three  parts  :  the  major 
premise,  the  minor  premise,  and  the  conclusion. 
Augustine  made  use  of  such  analogies  drawn  from 
the  composite  nature  of  the  soul  and  its  activities 
in  his  work  on  the  Trinity.  These  tripartite  dis- 
tinctions which  he  finds  in  the  faculties  of  man 
are  not  of  a  very  scientific  character,  but  they 
show  that  Aristotle's  idea  of  a  triad  as  a  part  of 
the  constitution  of  nature  and  as  somehow  symbol- 


THE  RISE  OF  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES     19 

izing  the  divine  existence  was  a  fertile  thought, 
and  found  reception  in  other  minds.  A  consider- 
able portion  of  Augustine's  treatise  is  devoted  to 
the  comparison  of  God  as  existing  in  trinity  and 
man  as  having  a  trinity  of  faculties  and  modes  of 
thought  and  action. 

The  same  line  of  defense  of  the  mysterious,  if 
not  contradictory,  character  of  God,  as  triime  or 
tri-personal,  has  been  adopted  by  many  later  theo- 
logians. The  position  has  been  taken  that  in  the 
very  nature  of  things  God  must  exist  in  trinity, 
and  that  such  a  trinitarian  mode  of  existence  is 
essential  to  the  full  expression  of  the  moral  and 
personal  life  of  God.  The  point  to  be  noted  is 
that  it  is  an  argument  for  the  dogma  of  the  trinity 
drawn  from  the  triune  distinctions  found  in  nature 
and  in  man.  One  form  of  this  argument  is  seen 
in  the  so-called  "  social  trinity  "  recently  set  forth 
by  Shedd,  Fairbairn,  and  others,  —  a  view  which 
seems  to  have  a  singular  popularity.  It  seems  to 
be  assumed  that  a  person  must  be  put  into  social 
relations  with  some  other  person  or  persons  in 
order  to  the  exercise  of  self-consciousness,  and  as 
before  creation  God  was  alone  he  must  have  had 
an  interior  triple  personality  as  the  basis  of  con- 
scious existence.  This  theory  is  simply  another 
speculative  effort  to  explain  and  defend  the  three- 
ness  of  God;  but  it  is  psychologically  unsound. 
Self-consciousness,  which  is  the  condition  of  per- 
sonality, does  not  require  the  actual  existence  of 
any  individual  non-ego  in  order  to  its   activity. 


20  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

The  Ego  postulates  its  own  subjective  non-ego  by 
a  psychological  necessity.  It  is  the  mystery  of 
personality  that  the  subject  of  it  is  self-conscious, 
that  is,  has  self-communion.  God  as  a  person  is 
a  social  unit,  and  needs  no  trinity  of  persons  in 
order  to  the  exercise  of  his  social  nature.  Man 
certainly  is  not  a  "social  trinity,"  yet  the  first 
man  Adam  seems  to  have  been  very  sociable  with 
himself  before  Eve  was  created  to  be  a  helpmeet 
to  him.  When  Robinson  Crusoe,  in  the  realistic 
story  of  De  Foe,  was  cast  on  a  desert  island  with- 
out human  companionship,  was  it  necessary  that 
his  nature  should  be  trinitarianized  in  order  to  the 
continued  exercise  of  his  social,  moral  instincts  ? 
The  simple  suggestion  of  it  carries  on  its  face  its 
utter  absurdity.  What  makes  the  story  so  true 
to  life  is  the  natural  way  in  which  Robinson  lives 
alone,  keeps  a  diary  of  his  long  solitude,  and  tells 
us  how  he  sighed  and  wept  over  his  lonely  lot. 
Did  it  ever  occur  to  any  one  that  Crusoe  was  in 
danger  of  losing  his  mind  or  capacity  of  seK-con- 
sciousness  during  those  twelve  years  of  complete 
isolation  ?  Rather,  in  fact,  were  not  his  faculties 
of  personality  quickened  into  more  vigorous  activ- 
ity by  his  lonely  experience  ?  Such,  certainly,  is 
the  impression  made  by  the  story,  —  a  story  so 
artfully  told  that  it  has  all  the  verisimilitude  of  a 
historical  autobiography.  And  must  we  regard 
the  Divine  personality  as  deficient  in  those  quali- 
ties of  persistent  self-consciousness  which  are  so 
plainly  inherent  in  human  persons  ? 


THE  EISE  OF  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES     21 

Of  all  the  metaphysical  or  logical  theories  that 
have  originated  in  the  effort  to  make  rational 
and  comprehensible  to  faith  the  traditional  dogma 
of  the  Christian  trinity  as  three  persons  in  one 
God,  this  one  of  a  social  trinity,  though  it  has  the 
prestige  of  many  distinguished  advocates,  is  the 
most  illogical  and  fatuous.  As  an  explanation  of 
the  divine  tri-unity,  it  is  a  more  concrete  form 
of  the  metaphysical  conception  of  trinity  as  in- 
volved in  thesis,  antithesis,  and  synthesis,  but  it  is 
equally  fallacious.  Dr.  Schaff  confesses  that  the 
distinction  of  thesis,  antithesis,  and  synthesis  gives 
only  a  Sabellian  trinity,  and  a  "  social  trinity  "  is 
not  tri-personal,  for  God's  self-consciousness  is 
uni-personal,  as  is  that  of  every  moral  being.  I 
refer  to  these  examples  of  later  theorizing  on  the 
question  of  the  necessity  of  a  trinity  in  God  as 
showing  how  easily  speculative  thought  may  take 
this  direction,  since  natural  analogies  seem  to  fa- 
vor it. 

But  whatever  view  be  taken  of  such  speculative 
arguments  for  a  trinity  in  God,  from  psychologi- 
cal, logical,  or  social  analogies,  there  is  no  evidence 
that  they  ever  arose  in  ancient  times.  They  be- 
long to  a  highly  reflective  and  philosophical  age. 
I  am  even  inclined  to  doubt  whether  the  Ethnic 
trinities  owe  their  origin  and  growth  in  any  way 
to  such  refinements  of  thought  as  are  connected 
with  attaching  a  sacred  and  mystical  character  to 
numbers.  The  Pythagorean  doctrine  that  num- 
bers form  the  substance  of  things   is  an  after- 


22  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

thought  of  a  quite  fully  developed  civilization. 
The  Etlinic  trinities  were  a  spontaneous  evolu- 
tion of  the  mythopoeic  imagination  of  uncivilized 
man,  rather  than  a  product  of  the  speculative  rea- 
son, and  their  real  causes  must  be  sought  in  other 
directions. 

Recent  anthropological  investigations  have 
brought  out  into  full  light  the  fact  that  \hQ  fam- 
ily based  on  the  union  of  the  sexes  is  the  original 
foundation  of  human  society.  Such  is  the  picture 
given  of  the  beginnings  of  social  order  in  Genesis, 
and  it  accords  with  the  latest  results  of  histor- 
ical criticism.  The  most  conspicuous  and  potent 
principle  of  all  life  in  the  view  of  early  man  was 
generation.  This  required  the  masculine  and 
feminine  elements  —  the  two  uniting  to  produce 
a  third,  namely,  a  son.  Father,  mother,  son,  — 
these  form  the  social  trinity  that  lies  behind  all 
human  life  and  society.  But  this  early  interpreta- 
tion of  things  did  not  stop  there.  Generation  was 
made  equally  the  cause  of  the  foundation  of  the 
world.  All  the  early  cosmogonies  and  cosmologies 
are  built  on  this  theory.  Two  original  principles  — 
as,  for  example,  the  Heaven  and  Earth  of  Hesiod, 
which  are  personified  as  male  and  female,  or,  in 
the  Chaldaeo-Babylonian  religion,  Ea,  the  god  of 
water,  and  Damkina,  his  wife,  goddess  of  earth  — 
unite  to  produce  through  successive  generations 
the  world.  It  is  but  a  step  further  to  introduce 
a  triad  of  gods  as  the  generative  source  not  only 
of  the  world  and  man,  but  also  of  all  the  gods  of 


THE  RISE  OF  THE  ETHNIC   TRINITIES     23 

polytheism.  And  in  fact  this  generative  idea,  with 
its  triad  of  Father,  Mother,  and  Son,  gives  us  the 
keynote  of  the  Ethnic  trinities.  Professor  Sayce, 
in  his  "  Hibbert  Lectures,"  declares  :  "  The  only 
genuine  trinity  that  can  be  discovered  in  the  re- 
ligious faith  of  early  Chaldsea  was  that  old  Acca- 
dian  system  which  conceived  of  a  divine  father  and 
mother  by  the  side  of  their  son,  the  sun  god ;  "  and 
he  further  adds  :  "  The  keystone  of  Semitic  belief 
was  the  generative  character  of  the  deity.  A  lan- 
guage which  divided  nouns  into  masculine  and 
feminine  found  it  difficult  to  conceive  of  a  deity 
which  was  not  masculine  and  feminine  too.  The 
divine  hierarchy  was  necessarily  regarded  as  a 
family,  at  the  head  of  which  stood  '  father  Bel.'  " 
The  study  of  the  other  Ethnic  religions  discloses 
the  same  fact.  With  many  variations  of  form 
the  generative  triad  is  the  principle  that  binds 
aU  these  religions  together  and  gives  us  one  key 
to  the  explanation  of  their  trinitarian  character. 
Here  is  the  explanation  of  the  origin  of  the  term 
father  —  so  frequent  a  name  of  the  first  and  high- 
est god  in  all  the  Ethnic  religions.  The  tradi- 
tional idea  that  the  fatherhood  of  God  is  a  part 
of  the  new  revelation  of  the  Christian  gospel  is 
a  historical  error.  It  pervades  the  Ethnic  reli- 
gions, and  lies  at  the  foundations  of  the  Ethnic 
trinities.  Homer's  title  of  Zeus,  "  father  of  gods 
and  men,"  was  a  part  of  the  religious  inheritance 
of  the  Aryan  race;  and  behind  the  Hebrew  Se- 
mitic belief  in  Jehovah  as  the  creator  and  father  of 


24  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

mankind  was  the  earlier  ChaldaBO-Babylonian  faith 
in  "  the  sovereign  father  Ea."  Plato  showed  his 
reUgious  conservatism  in  calling  the  creator  of  the 
world  and  man,  in  his  "  Timaeus,"  "  the  great  father 
of  the  gods."  Even  Plotinus,  pantheist  as  he  was, 
continually  styles  his  first  hypostasis,  to  li/,  "  Fa- 
ther," paying  so  much  of  deference  to  tradition. 
When  Jesus  of  Nazareth  taught  his  disciples  to 
pray,  "  Our  Father,  who  art  in  heaven,"  he  was 
only  following,  though  with  new  insight  and  clearer 
apprehension,  the  well-nigh  universal  religious  con- 
sciousness of  the  race. 

The  feminine  element,  which  was  fundamental 
in  the  generative  theory,  kept  its  place  and  func- 
tion in  the  Ethnic  trinities.  The  first  and  second 
members  of  a  triad  are  usually  husband  and  wife, 
thus  preparing  the  way  for  the  son,  or  third  per- 
son, who  often  becomes  the  chief  object  of  faith 
and  worship,  for  a  reason  which  wlQ  soon  appear. 
The  prominence  of  the  female  goddess  is  marked 
in  all  the  ancient  religions.  In  the  Homeric 
Olympus,  Here  and  Athene  are  closely  connected 
with  Zeus  in  power  and  function.  So  in  the 
Roman  religion,  Juno  and  Minerva  form  with 
Jupiter  the  Capitoline  triad.  In  the  Egyptian 
trinity  of  Osiris,  Isis,  and  Horus,  Isis,  the  wife  and 
mother,  was  the  most  popular  member,  and  Isis 
temples  and  rites  became  the  fashion  at  Rome  in 
the  Imperial  times.  Ashtaroth,  whose  name  ap- 
pears in  the  Old  Testament,  was,  under  the  name 
of  Istar,  a  member  of  the  Babylonian  triad,  and 


THE  RISE  OF  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES     25 

had  a  Chaldsean  origin.  It  is  to  be  said,  however, 
that  the  feminine  element  is  less  prominent  in  later 
Ethnic  trinities,  and  in  the  latest  and  most  fully- 
developed  examples,  namely,  the  Hindoo  and  Plo- 
tinian,  it  quite  disappears,  and  a  masculine  mem- 
ber takes  its  place.  But  while  the  aspects  of  wife 
and  mother  faded  out  of  view  in  many  of  the 
Ethnic  trinities,  the  aspect  of  son,  as  the  third 
member  of  the  triad,  grew  continually  in  impor- 
tance and  conspicuousness,  —  supplanting  often 
the  first  god  or  father  in  popular  favor  and  wor- 
ship. Thus  Marduk,  the  great  god  of  the  Baby- 
lonians, is  a  god-son  of  "  the  sovereign  father 
Ea."  Among  his  titles  are  "  first-born  son,"  "  only- 
begotten,"  "  holy  son." 

The  naturalistic  character  of  the  Ethnic  trini- 
ties here  comes  into  distinct  view.  Among  the 
earliest,  most  remarkable,  and  widespread  forms 
of  human  worship  was  that  of  the  sun  or  sun-god. 
Traces  of  it  are  found  in  almost  every  known  re- 
ligion, and  its  popularity  grew  from  age  to  age. 
Never  was  it  greater  than  in  the  latest  Graeco- 
Roman  times.  Constantine,  before  his  conversion 
to  Christianity,  was  a  devoted  worshiper  of  He- 
lios or  Apollo,  the  sun-god,  and  Julian  his  nephew, 
the  last  pagan  emperor,  made  sun  worship  the 
centre  of  his  New  Platonic  religion.  Thus,  in 
the  Greek  world  Father  Zeus  had  given  place  in 
popular  belief  to  his  son,  the  sun-god  Apollo. 
The  same  was  true  in  the  Egyptian  world,  where 
the    sun-god  Horus,  the   son  of  Isis  and  Osiris, 


26  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

became  the  popular  divinity.  It  is  interesting  to 
note  how  easily  the  third  member  of  the  Ethnic 
triad,  the  son,  became  metamorphosed  into  the 
sun-god.  The  Babylonian  Marduk  was  the  sun- 
god,  like  the  Greek  Apollo  and  the  Egyptian 
Horus,  and  thus  the  deep  hold  of  sun  worship  on 
men  was  transferred  to  the  son  of  the  generative 
triad  and  increased  his  greatness  and  power.  So 
that  it  may  be  said  that  when  Christianity  began 
to  spread  in  the  world,  its  most  powerful  competi- 
tor and  rival  was  that  member  of  the  Ethnic 
triads  which  represented  the  product  of  the  gen- 
erative principle  and  which  also  represented  the 
latest  relic  of  the  primeval  nature  worship,  the 
sun-god,  the  god  of  light,  heat,  life,  and  blessing 
to  the  world. 

But  there  is  another  distinct  line  of  causation 
that  played  its  part  in  the  Ethnic  trinitarian  de- 
velopment. The  earliest  religious  attitude  of  men 
toward  the  powers  of  nature,  which  they  mytholo- 
gized  into  supernatural  divine  beings,  was  one  of 
fear  and  supplication.  But  how  could  they  reach 
the  ears  of  the  sovereign  Father  of  the  gods,  who 
dwelt  in  the  highest  heavens?  The  need  of  a 
mediating  and  intercessory  being  between  man 
and  God  —  a  point  which  Plato  made  so  central 
in  his  dualistic  philosophy,  and  which  was  borrowed 
from  Platonism  and  developed  more  fully  by  Philo, 
Paul,  the  author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  and  finally 
by  Plotinus  in  New  Platonism  —  has  been  echoed 
by  all  human  souls  from  the  beginning  of  time. 


THE  RISE  OF  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES     27 

Ancient  philosophy  was  largely  employed  in  the 
effort  to  explain  how  the  deity  is  related  to  the 
world  and  man,  and  how  the  bridge  between  them 
can  be  crossed,  and  a  basis  be  established  for  hu- 
man prayer  and  worship  and  communion.  Plato's 
mediation  doctrine,  which  has  so  deeply  affected  all 
later  thought,  was  anticipated  in  the  Ethnic  trini- 
ties. Here  came  in  the  special  function  of  the 
son,  the  third  member  of  the  triad,  or  second  mem- 
ber, as  he  sometimes  became.  Merodach,  the  Baby- 
lonian sun-god,  "  the  son  of  Ea,  the  first-born  of 
the  gods,"  was  "  intercessor  between  god  and 
man,"  "  interpreter  of  the  will  of  his  father  Ea," 
"  the  redeemer."  So  Agni,  one  of  the  most  re- 
markable and  popular  of  the  ancient  deities  of 
India,  —  himself  triune,  also  a  member  of  a  trin- 
ity, namely,  Dyaus,  Indra,  Agni,  —  a  son  of 
Indra,  is  described  in  the  Vedic  hymns  as  "the 
best  friend  of  man  among  the  gods,"  as  "  not  far 
off,"  as  "  house  priest  and  friend,"  "  chief  sacrifi- 
cial priest,"  "messenger,"  "a  link  between  earth 
and  heaven,"  "  man's  guest."  In  a  hymn  to  Agni 
it  is  said :  "  May  he  bring  the  gods  here  to  us." 
"  As  a  father  to  his  son  be  easy  of  access  to  us." 
It  was  these  mediating  deities,  who  were  brought 
by  their  functions  into  nearer  and  closer  relations 
with  man,  that  became  the  great  objects  of  popular 
veneration  and  worship. 

It  is  to  be  noticed  in  this  connection  that  the 
mediative  idea  by  itself  requires  but  two  divine 
beings,  not  a  trinity.    But  even  the  mediating  god, 


28  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

the  son  of  the  father,  might  easily  be  regarded  as 
still  so  distant  as  to  need  another  mediating  being 
to  fill,  in  some  further  measure,  the  void.  It  was 
thus  that  Platonism  introduced  the  doctrine  of 
subordinate  gods  or  daemons  to  fill  the  middle 
stage  between  God  and  man.  So  we  find  in  one 
of  the  Babylonian  trinities  Merodach  raised  to  the 
second  place  in  the  triad,  and  a  second  mediator 
introduced  as  the  third  member.  This  helps  us 
to  understand  the  later  growth  and  greater  indefi- 
niteness  of  development  of  the  third  member  of 
several  Ethnic  trinities.  The  same  fact  occurs  in 
the  history  of  the  Christian  trinity,  and  will  be 
noticed  later. 

If  we  compare  the  generative  idea  with  that  of 
mediation  as  causes  producing  the  Ethnic  trinities, 
both  are  found  united  in  many  of  them,  and  that 
very  early  in  their  history.  In  fact,  the  two  ideas 
run  naturally  together  and  form  parts  of  one  gen- 
eral view.  Sonship  and  mediatorship  are  closely 
affiliated.  Who  can  so  well  represent  the  father 
of  our  race  as  his  own  son?  Christianity  laid 
hold  of  this  natural  affiliation  in  its  doctrine  that 
God  sent  his  only  begotten  Son  into  the  world  to 
be  his  messenger  of  love  and  mercy  and  to  be  a 
mediator  between  him  and  his  human  creatures. 

In  considering  the  causes  that  have  contributed 
to  the  production  of  the  Ethnic  trinities  we  might 
stop  at  this  point,  for  we  think  the  two  great 
causes  have  been  brought  to  light.  Generation  as 
the  original  force  in  the  formation  of  the  world 


THE  RISE  OF  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES     29 

of  gods  and  men,  and  mediatorship  as  the  great 
principle  by  which  aU  moral  beings  are  brought 
into  relations  of  amity  and  fellowship  with  God, 
—  these  afford  a  satisfactory  historical  explanation 
of  the  Ethnic  trinities,  and  we  need  look  no 
farther.  But  the  survey  is  not  quite  complete 
without  considering  a  point  or  two  more.  We 
have  seen  that  in  the  Ethnic  religions  there  was  a 
historical  evolution  from  multiplicity  to  unity.  In 
this  movement  the  Ethnic  trinities  were  a  sort  of 
half-way  house,  and  it  was  natural  that  some  of 
them  should  stop  there,  while  others  moved  on  to 
dualism,  and  others  still  to  monism.  It  may  be 
even  said  of  several  Ethnic  religions  that  they  are 
polytheistic,  trinitarian,  dualistic,  and  monistic. 
This  is  especially  true  of  the  Persian  Zoroastrian- 
ism,  one  of  the  purest  and  noblest  of  them  all,  an- 
ticipating in  many  of  its  doctrines  those  of  Chris- 
tianity. The  Ethnic  trinities  were  also  a  natural 
stage  in  the  pantheistic  counter-evolution  from 
unity  to  multiplicity,  which  was  an  outgrowth  of 
philosophic  thought,  and  is  illustrated  in  Hin- 
dooism  and  Plotinian  New  Platonism.  Hindooism, 
starting  from  unity  in  Brahm,  proceeds  to  the  tri- 
murti,  Brahma,  Vishnu,  and  Civa,  and  thence  on 
down  through  the  whole  pantheon  of  divine  beings 
to  man  and  the  lowest  forms  of  existence.  So 
Plotinus  made  his  starting-point  a  pure  abstrac- 
tion, TO  €v  (the  one),  out  of  which  he  drew  his 
"three  hypostases,"  which  became  the  fountain- 
head  of  an  evolution  that  embraced  all  things.     It 


30  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

is  a  curious  fact  that  the  most  recent  effort  of 
Christian  trinitarian  theologians  to  set  forth  the 
triple  nature  of  God,  as  most  completely  satisfying 
the  speculative  reason  in  its  efforts  to  harmonize 
the  conflicting  categories  of  unity  and  multiplicity, 
or  of  sameness  and  difference,  is  precisely  that 
which  marks  the  philosophic  trinitarianism  of  the 
Ethnic  religions.  Surely  speculative  philosophies 
in  their  attempts  to  solve  the  mysteries  of  the  uni- 
verse often  find  themselves  in  strange  company, 
and  the  moral  is  that  some  mysteries  which  must 
be  accepted  as  facts  can  never  be  satisfactorily 
explained.  It  is  the  old.  story,  so  continually  re- 
hearsed, of  the  captive  bird  uselessly  chafing  its 
wings  against  the  network  of  the  cage  that  holds 
it  with  a  relentless  grasp.  The  common  panthe- 
istic tendency  that  lurks  in  all  these  vain  attempts 
is  strikingly  apparent. 


CHAPTER  in 

GENEEAL   CHAKACTER   AND   RELATIONS   OF  THE 
ETHNIC   TRINITIES 

We  pass  now  from  the  causes  that  united  to 
develop  the  Ethnic  trinities  to  a  more  direct  con- 
sideration of  their  interior  characteristics.  The 
facts  at  the  basis  of  such  a  consideration  cover  so 
vast  a  field  that  it  is  impossible  to  attempt  any- 
thing more  than  a  cursory  survey.  It  is  essential, 
however,  to  any  adequate  comparison  of  the  Ethnic 
trinities  with  the  Christian  trinitarian  dogma,  such 
as  is  proposed,  that  this  part  of  the  subject  should 
be  carefuUy  examined,  and,  after  a  summary  gen- 
eral statement,  I  shall  give  a  more  minute  account 
of  several  of  the  Ethnic  trinities  that  were  more 
highly  developed,  and  that  present  interesting 
points  of  comparison  to  the  Christian  trinity. 

A  comparative  examination  of  the  Ethnic  trini- 
ties reveals  many  points  of  clear  resemblance  and 
also  considerable  variety  of  form  and  development. 
The  resemblances  suggest  the  question  whether 
they  do  not  all  spring  from  a  common  root.  That 
there  was  such  a  common  root  in  the  form  of  a 
primitive  revelation  to  the  first  parents  of  the  race 
has  been  the  traditional  view  of  Christian  theolo- 
gians ;  but  it   is  completely   overthrown   by  the 


32  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

whole  trend  of  historical  investigation.  The  very- 
differences,  which  are  quite  radical  and  appear  in 
the  earliest  historical  times,  indicate  diverse  and 
independent  origins.  The  old  unscientific  theory 
of  an  original  unity  of  the  race,  with  a  single  an- 
cestral abode,  language,  and  religion,  is  contradicted 
by  the  plainest  historical  facts.  Such  unity  is  the 
still  far-off  goal  of  human  civilization  and  pro- 
gress, —  still  a  political,  ecclesiastical,  and  philoso- 
phical ideal,  not  a  fact  of  man's  beginnings.  The 
pre-Adamite,  pre-historical  men  were  essentially 
savages.  Gradually  populating  and  spreading 
over  the  vast  wilds  of  the  earth,  they  roved  in 
small  clans  whither  they  would,  until  the  nomadic 
state  gave  place  to  the  agricultural  and  stationary. 
Meanwhile  diverse  languages,  customs,  traditions, 
ideas,  modes  of  social  and  political  life,  grew  up 
everywhere.  Such  a  thing  as  a  general  wide- 
spread social  order  was  utterly  unknown.  SmaU 
tribes  lived  in  isolation  or  in  frequent  war,  resist- 
ing all  intrusions  from  without.  It  was  in  such  a 
condition  of  human  life  that  the  different  Ethnic 
religions  and  trinities  had  their  earliest  begin- 
nings. To  explain  them  by  intercommunication 
and  borrowing  of  religious  ideas  is  impossible,  for 
they  are  found  at  the  same  time  in  all  parts  of  the 
world,  in  Asia,  Africa,  Europe,  America,  and  the 
islands  of  the  Pacific.  There  is  only  one  rational 
way  to  account  for  them.  They  are  the  result  of 
the  common  religious  instincts  and  needs  of  human 
nature.    At  first  sight  it  seems  strange  that  so  many 


RELATIONS  OF  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES    33 

independent  trinitarian  religions  should  have  arisen 
spontaneously  among  men.  But  the  study  we  have 
already  made  of  the  causes  that  worked  toward 
their  formation  goes  far  to  solve  the  mystery. 
These  causes  deal  mainly  with  facts,  laws,  condi- 
tions, needs,  aspirations,  of  a  universal  character. 
In  truth,  the  prevalence  of  divine  triads  in  the  re- 
ligions of  the  world  is  to  be  explained  in  the  same 
general  way  as  the  wide  prevalence  of  sacrificial 
cults,  of  idolatrous  worship,  of  rites  such  as  cir- 
cumcision and  baptism,  of  calendars  of  holy  and 
secular  days,  and  especially  of  a  seventh  day  of 
peculiar  sacredness.  All  these  ideas,  customs, 
rites,  institutions,  are  a  natural  and  spontaneous 
outgrowth  of  the  common  conditions  and  yearnings 
of  man's  religious  nature.  They  are  not  peculiar 
to  any  one  people  or  class  of  peoples,  but  are  the 
common  inheritance  of  the  race.  The  same  is  true 
of  a  doctrine  of  God.  The  religious  instincts  of 
man  cry  out  for  "  God,  the  living  God,"  and  every- 
where throughout  the  world,  even  among  the  most 
degraded  tribes,  some  conception  of  God  has  taken 
shape  iQ  some  form  of  religious  faith  and  worship. 
The  Ethnic  trinities  are  simply  developments  of 
such  religious  impulses  and  cravings.  Man  cre- 
ates God  in  his  own  image.  He  sees  the  genera- 
tive force  operative  in  all  nature,  and  he  builds 
a  theogony  of  deity  in  which  Fatherhood  and 
Motherhood  and  Sonship  play  their  parts.  He 
looks  upon  God  as  far  distant  in  the  heavens, 
dwelling  in  sun,  moon,  and  stars,  and,  fearing  his 


34  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

power,  he  builds  a  triad  in  whicli  a  son-mediator 
may  be  a  daysman  between  him  and  his  Maker. 
He  sees  or  fancies  he  sees  a  triple  character  or 
principle  at  work  in  the  world,  and  so  he  invests 
the  number  three  with  a  peculiar  sacredness  and 
reduces  his  divine  pantheon  to  a  trinity  of  beings 
that  somehow  represents  or  includes  the  whole. 

But  while  common  religious  instincts  and  wants 
produced  a  common  trinitarianism  among  numer- 
ous separated  tribes  and  nations,  there  are  wide 
divergences  among  them  in  the  strictness  and  com- 
pleteness of  the  trinitarian  development.  In  some 
of  them  it  is  loosely  and  hesitatingly  set  forth, 
in  others  much  more  rigidly  and  definitely.  This 
usually  depends  upon  the  degree  of  intellectual 
and  philosophical  advancement  of  the  people.  The 
French  archaeologist,  A.  Bertrand,  in  his  recent 
most  instructive  work,  "La  Religion  des  Gau- 
lois,"  proves  beyond  question  from  archaeological 
discoveries  the  existence  of  triads  and  trinitarian 
ideas  among  the  Gauls;  but  such  ideas  assumed 
the  crudest  and  most  iUusive  shapes,  as,  for  in- 
stance, in  the  tricephalous  or  three-faced  heads  of 
divinities  found  on  altars  and  vases.  On  the  other 
hand,  among  the  more  highly  civilized  Chaldaeans, 
Babylonians,  Assyrians,  and  Egyptians,  triads  of 
^ods  were  a  common  and  notable  feature  of  their 
theogonies.  It  is,  however,  among  the  three  most 
philosophically  cultured  peoples  of  the  ancient 
world  that  the  most  highly  developed  trinities  are 
found,  namely,  the  Hindoos,  the  Persians,  and  the 


RELATIONS  OF  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES    35 

Greeks.  The  Zoroastrian,  the  Brahmanistic,  and 
New  Platonic  trinities  are  not  only  quite  fully  de- 
veloped along  the  line  of  the  trinitarian  evolution, 
but  form  component  parts  of  highly  elaborated 
philosophical  systems,  reminding  one  of  the  subtle 
theological  speculations  of  the  Nicene  age  on  which 
were  built  the  wonderful  metaphysical  superstruc- 
ture of  the  homoousian  trinity. 

Akin  to  this  class  of  facts  is  the  noticeable  ease 
with  which  the  Ethnic  trinities  are  modified  or  re- 
adjusted to  meet  new  circumstances  or  influences, 
while  still  preserving  their  trinitarian  character. 
The  names  and  offices  of  the  three  members  of  the 
triad  are  subject  to  change.  The  earlier  Accadian 
trinity  becomes  reorganized  among  the  Babyloni- 
ans, and  the  Babylonian  trinity  in  turn  is  amended 
by  the  Assyrians.  Egypt  had  numerous  local 
trinitarian  cults.  There  was  one  triad  at  Mem- 
phis, another  at  Thebes,  another  at  Abydos,  and 
almost  every  district  had  its  local  triad.  Even  in 
the  same  locality  a  triad  had  a  fluxive  character, 
at  least  so  far  as  names  and  functions  were  con- 
cerned. The  number  three  itself  was  sometimes 
invaded  or  its  significance  extended.  In  some 
Egyptian  localities  a  fourth  god  was  added,  though 
usually  of  a  subordinate  character.  It  was  also 
the  case  in  Egypt  especially,  where  the  trinitarian 
element  was  wholly  subject  to  the  universal  poly- 
theism, that  there  should  be  triple  combinations  of 
triads,  and  even  a  further  triplicity.  The  fam- 
ily or  generative  idea  that  was  so  fundamental  to 


36  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

almost  all  the  Ethnic  trinities  also  tended  to  give 
elasticity  to  the  triads.  Each  of  the  gods  in  the 
Babylonian  triad  had  his  wife,  and  wives  were 
common  in  many  Ethnic  trinities,  thus  in  a  sense 
duplicating  the  number,  though  it  is  doubtful 
whether  the  wives  were  thought  of  as  separate  from 
their  male  companions.  These  peculiarities  of  the 
Ethnic  trinities  are  of  course  to  be  explained  by 
the  common  polytheism  that  underlies  them  all, 
though  this  polytheistic  feature  is  less  obtrusive  in 
some  cases  than  in  others.  As  we  have  seen,  a 
triad  of  gods  is  a  natural  stage  in  any  polytheistic 
or  monotheistic  evolution.  What  is  remarkable  is 
that,  in  any  thoroughly  polytheistic  form  of  reli- 
gion, the  idea  of  a  trinity  should  have  had  such 
prominence  or  persistency.  It  helps  one  to  realize 
how  deep  must  have  been  the  impression  made  on 
the  ancient  world  by  those  phenomena  of  nature 
and  of  man  that  led  them  to  place  generation  and 
mediatorship  at  the  very  basis  of  their  religious 
ideas  of  God  and  of  his  relations  with  themselves. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  HINDOO  BEAHMANIC  TRINITY 

From  this  general  survey  I  pass  to  a  particular 
description  of  the  three  great  representatives  of 
the  Ethnic  trinities,  namely,  the  Hindoo,  the  Zoro- 
astrian,  and  the  Greek.  This  chapter  will  be  de- 
voted to  the  Hindoo. 

The  Hindoo  religion  appears  in  the  Vedas  in 
full  polytheistic  form,  as  a  deification  of  the  phe- 
nomena and  powers  of  nature.  There  were  three 
classes  of  divinities,  the  gods  of  the  sky,  of  the 
lower  atmosphere,  and  of  the  earth.  The  earliest 
worship  made  the  sky  gods  most  prominent,  but 
the  tendency  was  towards  the  prominence  of  the 
lower  divinities,  since  they  were  supposed  to  be  in 
closer  relations  with  men.  Thus  the  earlier  sky 
gods  give  way  to  the  atmospheric  gods,  and  they 
in  turn  to  the  earth  gods.  Varuna  is  supplanted 
by  Indra,  and  Indra  in  turn  by  Agni,  who  be- 
comes the  central  deity  of  the  whole  Hindoo  poly- 
theistic pantheon,  —  a  triune  god,  "  the  first  trial- 
ity,"  comprehending  in  himself  the  threefold  unity, 
typical  of  earth,  atmosphere,  and  heaven.  Here 
already  the  pantheistic  strain  begins  to  appear, 
which  finally  in  later  Hindoo  philosophy  triumphs 
completely  over  the  earlier  polytheism.     Of  Agni 


38  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

it  is  said,  "  in  Mm  are  all  the  gods."  It  is  this 
peculiar  character  of  earth  god,  including  also  the 
higher  orders  of  divinities,  that  invests  him  with 
the  mediatorial  functions  of  which  I  have  already 
spoken.  This  triune  feature  of  Agni  is  described 
in  language  that  reminds  one  forcibly  of  modern 
Sabellian  expressions  concerning  the  Christian 
trinity.  "  Threefold  is  my  light."  "  He  is  aU 
threefold,  three  are  his  tongues,  his  births,  his 
places  of  sojourn,  thrice  led  about  the  sacrifice  given 
thrice  a  day."  Meanwhile  the  trinitarian  idea  is 
emerging  already  in  the  Vedic  period,  fluctuating, 
however,  in  the  names  of  the  triad  as  the  tendency 
of  popular  thought  and  worship  passes  from  the 
higher  to  the  lower  gods,  until  it  takes  a  more  pro- 
nounced shape  in  Dyaus,  Indra,  and  Agni,  which 
may  be  called  the  Vedic  trinity,  as  compared  with 
the  later  Brahmanic  trinity  of  Brahma,  Vishnu, 
and  Civa.  This  Vedic  trinity  illustrates  the  ten- 
dency from  the  primitive  subordination  of  the 
lower  deities  to  their  equality  with  the  higher  and 
to  the  practical  substitution  of  the  third  member 
for  the  first  and  second  in  the  popular  faith  and 
worship.  It  is  Agni,  the  third  member  of  the 
Vedic  trinity,  who  is  creator  of  the  world,  and  high- 
priest  and  mediator  and  guest  and  friend  of  man. 
This  feature  of  Hindooism  is  the  historical  pre- 
cursor of  a  similar  development  in  the  history  of 
the  Christian  trinitarian  dogma,  where  the  earlier 
subordination  element  in  the  case  of  the  second 
and  third  persons  is  at  length  wholly  obliterated  by 


THE  HINDOO  BRAHMANIC  TRINITY       39 

Augustine  and  the  Western  Churcli,  and  a  com- 
plete equality  is  established.  The  pantheistic  ele- 
ment which  is  to  be  noted  in  the  triune  character 
of  Agni  grows  more  and  more  pronounced  in  later 
Vedic  times.  There  is  a  tendency  to  a  unification 
of  divinities,  which  prepares  the  way  for  the  com- 
plete pantheism  of  the  Brahmanic  period.  The 
language  of  the  priests  and  philosophers  reminds 
us  of  the  Stoic  writers  by  whom  the  old  gods  are 
still  honored  with  the  lips,  and  the  polytheistic  lan- 
guage is  retained,  but  whose  figurative  or  allegori- 
cal method  of  interpretation  reduces  it  all  to  the 
baldest  pantheism.  It  is  at  this  point  that  the 
idea  of  the  God-Father  rises  into  notice,  in  a  way 
that  is  suggestive  of  Platonism,  especially  in  its 
New  Platonic  form. 

The  next  stage  in  the  evolution  of  Hindooism  is 
Buddhism,  —  one  of  the  most  remarkable  move- 
ments in  the  world's  religious  history.  Gautama 
or  Buddha,  "  the  enlightened,"  as  he  came  to  be 
called,  was  not  a  radical  reformer  of  the  Vedic 
faith,  but  a  saint,  or  earnest  seeker  after  personal 
salvation.  He  opened  a  new  "  way "  to  heaven. 
While  Brahmanism  sought  the  heavenly  life 
through  knowledge  or  asceticism,  Gautama  sought 
it  by  purity  and  love.  Philosophically  he  was  an 
agnostic,  but  Buddhism  as  a  religion  became  athe- 
istic, acknowledging  neither  god  nor  personal  im- 
mortality. Gautama  resembled  Jesus  in  this,  that 
he  was  not  a  dogmatist  but  a  moral  teacher.  The 
similarity  between  the  teachings  of  Buddha  and 


40  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

those  of  Christ  is  certainly  striking.  He  pro- 
claimed a  free  gospel  for  aU  men,  declaring  against 
all  castes  or  priesthoods  or  aristocracy  of  know- 
ledge. How  strange  in  an  age  when  the  religion 
of  the  many  was  so  radically  different  from  that 
of  the  few  to  hear  such  words  as  these :  "  I  have 
preached  the  truth  without  making  any  distinction 
between  exoteric  and  esoteric  doctrine,  for  in  re- 
spect of  truth,  Avander,  your  master,  has  no  such 
thing  as  the  closed  fist  of  a  teacher  who  keeps 
some  things  back."  If  one  would  realize  how 
full  of  reminders  Buddha's  teaching  was  of  the 
sayings  of  Christ,  in  its  whole  tenor  and  spirit,  let 
him  read  the  Dhammapada,  one  of  the  canoni- 
cal books  of  the  Buddhists,  which  contains  a  col- 
lection of  the  reputed  sayings  of  Buddha.  How 
authentic  this  collection  is  it  is  impossible  to  say, 
but  certainly  it  was  believed  to  be  such  by  Bud- 
dhists of  a  later  generation,  and  it  breathes  a  spirit 
of  religion  "pure  and  undefiled,"  as  realistic  as 
the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  or  the  parable  of  the 
sower.  The  "  kingdom  of  God  "  for  Buddha,  like 
Christ's,  was  "  within."  Righteousness  was  not  a 
matter  of  outward  works,  or  ceremonies,  but  of 
inward  character.  Let  me  give  a  few  selections 
from  Buddha's  sayings  in  illustration :  "  All  that 
we  are  is  the  result  of  what  we  have  thought.  If 
a  man  speaks  or  acts  with  a  pure  thought,  happi- 
ness follows  him  like  a  shadow  that  never  leaves 
him."  "  Hatred  does  not  cease  by  hatred  at  any 
time ;  hatred  ceases  by  love :  this  is  an  old  rule." 


THE  HINDOO  BRAHMANIC  TRINITY       41 

"  If  a  man  conquer  himself  he  is  the  greatest  of 
conquerors."  "Bad  deeds  and  deeds  hurtful  to 
ourselves  are  easy  to  do ;  what  is  beneficial  and 
good,  that  is  very  difficult  to  do."  "  Let  a  man 
overcome  anger  by  love  ;  let  him  overcome  evil  by 
good."  "  Speak  the  truth,  do  not  yield  to  anger, 
give  if  thou  art  asked  for  little,  and  by  these  three 
steps  thou  wilt  go  near  the  gods."  "  The  best 
of  men  is  he  who  has  eyes  to  see."  "  As  a  solid 
rock  is  not  shaken  by  the  wind,  wise  people  falter 
not  amidst  blame  and  praise."  "  First  of  all  let  a 
man  establish  himself  in  the  good,  then  only  can 
he  instruct  others."  "  He  who  is  permeated  by 
goodness,  let  him  turn  to  the  land  of  peace,  where 
transientness  finds  an  end,  to  happiness."  "  A  rest 
like  that  of  the  deep  sea,  calm  and  clear,  the  wise 
find  who  hear  the  truth."  Surely,  if  these  pas- 
sages were  incorporated  bodily  in  Christ's  Sermon 
on  the  Mount,  there  would  be  no  moral  jar,  rather 
a  complete  rhythmic  spiritual  harmony.  We  shall 
not  be  surprised  now  to  find  that  Buddha  taught 
a  gospel  that  was  for  all  mankind.  "  The  Exalted 
One  appears  in  the  world  for  salvation,  for  joy  to 
many  people,  out  of  compassion  for  the  world,  for 
the  blessing,  the  salvation,  the  joy  of  gods  and 
men." 

No  authentic  biography  of  Buddha  has  come 
down  to  us.  The  earliest  accounts  were  sayings 
or  logia  placed  in  a  historical  setting  of  narrative 
to  explain  the  occasion  of  what  was  said,  very 
much  as  the  Memorabilia  of  Socrates  by  Xeno- 


42  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

phon  were  constructed,  or  the  Synoptic  gospels. 
The  later  lives,  which  bear  so  close  a  likeness  in 
many  ways  to  the  gospel  accounts  of  Christ,  are 
wholly  legendary.  One  of  the  most  remarkable  of 
these  legends  is  that  of  Buddha's  temptation  by 
Mara  the  Evil  One.  The  earliest  form  of  the  tra- 
dition was  that  Buddha,  before  setting  out  on  his 
public  career,  fasted  for  twenty-eight  days.  The 
temptation  was  a  later  addition.  Of  course  the 
marvelous  similarity  of  the  account  to  that  given 
in  the  gospels  of  Christ's  fasting  and  temptation 
by  the  devil  strikes  every  reader.  Oldenberg  well 
says  on  this  point :  "  It  seems  scarcely  necessary 
to  observe  that  in  both  cases  the  same  obvious 
motives  have  given  rise  to  the  corresponding  nar- 
rative; the  notion  of  an  influence  exerted  by 
Buddhist  traditions  on  Christian  cannot  be  enter- 
tained." Neither  can  the  opposite  idea  of  a  coun- 
ter influence  be  considered ;  for  the  Buddhist  tra- 
dition is  certainly  the  earlier.  Such  legendary 
accounts  began  to  gather  around  the  life  of  Buddha 
not  many  years  after  his  death.  Buddha  himseK 
became  deified  and  finally  was  made  the  supreme 
deity,  incarnating  himself  from  time  to  time  in  one 
and  another  human  being.  His  birth  was  also 
made  miraculous,  involving  a  divine  as  well  as 
human  element. 

Buddhism  finally  became  a  sort  of  exile  from 
India,  but  its  leaven  remained,  and  later  trinitarian 
Hindooism  introduced  Buddha  into  its  pantheon 
as  one  of  the  incarnations  of  Vishnu.     This  brings 


THE  HINDOO   BRAHMANIC  TRINITY       43 

us  to  the  last  stage  of  the  development  of  Hindoo- 
ism,  the  great  sectarian  trinity  of  Brahma,  Vishnu, 
and  Civa. 

The  Hindoo  trimurti  grew  out  of  the  Brah- 
manic  pantheism,  which  was  itself  based  on  Vedic 
polytheism  with  its  triads.  Brahma  became  the 
absolute  god  of  pantheistic  Brahmanism,  while  the 
old  Vedic  divinities  were  retained  as  forms  or 
creations  of  Brahma.  The  Maha-bharata,  one  of 
the  two  great  Indian  epics,  gives  us  the  intermedi- 
ate stage  between  Brahmanism  and  the  more  com- 
pletely developed  Hindooism  of  later  times.  In 
this  epic  the  pantheistic  character  of  the  trinity 
is  clearly  visible.  There  is  one  absolute  form  of 
deity,  namely,  Brahma  or  Brahm,  but  he  appears 
in  three  personal  manifestations,  Vishnu,  Civa, 
Brahma,  "  one  form,  three  gods."  Everywhere  the 
real  identity  of  the  three  gods  is  implied.  Krishna, 
the  hero  of  the  epic,  who  is  represented  as  an  in- 
carnation of  Vishnu,  declares  himself  to  be  "  the 
supreme  being,  having  no  beginning,"  "the  pro- 
ductive cause  of  the  entire  universe,  and  also  its 
destroyer,"  "  the  beginning,  the  middle,  and  the 
end  of  beings,"  thus  identifying  himself  with 
Brahma  and  Civa  as  well  as  with  Vishnu,  and 
uniting  in  himseK  the  functions  of  aU  three.  But 
this  strongly  pantheistic  reaction  was  followed  by 
an  evolution  towards  a  more  systematized  trinita- 
rianism,  in  which  the  distinctly  personal  character 
of  the  members  of  the  trinity  is  emphasized.  The 
earlier  epical  definition  of  deity  as  "  one  form, 


44  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

three  gods "  is  inverted  into  "  three  gods,  one 
form."  Such  is  the  fully  developed  Hindoo  tri- 
murtL  But  it  must  not  be  supposed  that  the 
sectarian  trinity  of  later  Puranic  Hindooism  is 
any  less  pantheistic  in  fact  than  the  older  trinity 
of  the  Epic,  or  of  the  Brahmanical  books.  The 
question  among  the  sects  came  to  be  which  person 
of  the  three  is  the  true  Brahma.  This  is  the  pecul- 
iarity of  the  sectarian  orthodoxy  of  later  Hindoo- 
ism. Under  cover  of  it  different  sects  could  unite, 
—  each  calling  itself  trinitarian,  but  claiming  that 
the  trinity  of  Vishnu,  Civa,  and  Brahma  was 
really  contained  in  one  or  other  of  the  three.  This 
pantheistic  trinitarianism  "  was  eventually  repre- 
sented under  the  symbol  of  a  body  with  three 
heads  "  —  a  mode  of  setting  forth  triunity  which 
was  anticipated  by  the  Celtic  Gauls  in  their  crude 
altars  and  tombs  called  tricephales. 

Such  in  brief  is  the  history  of  the  evolution  of 
the  Hmdoo  trimurti.  Several  points  are  notice- 
able as  we  study  its  internal  character.  First,  it 
was  a  direct  historical  development  of  Vedic  reli- 
gious thought,  and  is  rooted  in  polytheistic,  and 
not  in  monotheistic  ideas,  thus  representing  a  stage 
from  multiplicity  to  unity  —  in  this  respect  differ- 
ing from  the  Christian  trinitarian  evolution,  which 
moved  from  unity  to  multiplicity,  and  agreeing 
with  all  the  Ethnic  trinities.  Secondly,  the  Hin- 
doo trimurti  represents  a  movement  on  philo- 
sophical lines  towards  a  pantheistic,  not  a  mono- 
theistic unity.     It  is  impossible,  within  the  limits 


THE  HINDOO  BRAHMANIC   TRINITY        45 

of  this  survey,  to  follow  all  the  successive  stages 
of  development.  The  old  Vedic  triads  gradually 
gave  way  to  new  ones,  and  to  a  more  complete 
poljrtheism,  with  a  dim  background  of  monothe- 
ism. This  principle  of  imity  became  a  subject  of 
philosophic  study,  and  in  Brahmanism  took  a  com- 
pletely pantheistic  form.  Brahm  was  at  first  the 
term  for  mere  eternal  absolute  existence.  This 
impersonal  form  of  deity  subsequently  became 
personalized  in  Brahma,  the  masculine  of  Brahm, 
and  formed  the  First  Person  of  the  Hindoo  trin- 
ity. Brahma  was  the  Creator  and  Father  of  all 
things.  As  the  Vedic  religion  starts  with  physi- 
cal phenomena  and  its  gods  are  personifications 
of  natural  forces,  so  the  Hindoo  philosophical 
trinity  followed  the  same  materialistic  lines.  AU 
phenomena  involve  three  laws  or  conditions  of 
existence,  generation  or  creation,  preservation,  de- 
struction and  reproduction,  and  these  forces  are  in 
constant  operation  through  succession  and  interac- 
tion. The  Hindoo  triad  laid  hold  of  these  trini- 
tarian  aspects  of  nature.  To  Brahma,  the  Creator, 
was  added  Vishnu,  one  of  the  oldest  Vedic  sun 
gods,  who  was  raised  to  a  higher  rank  as  the 
second  person  of  the  triad,  the  preserver.  Then 
Civa,  also  an  ancient  divinity,  under  the  form  of 
the  fire  god,  Rudra,  became  the  third  person,  as  the 
destroyer  and  regenerator.  Originally  these  three 
gods  were  not  regarded  as  forming  three  absolute 
independent  Beings,  but  as  created  and  dependent, 
while  on  an  equality  with  each  other,  being  com- 


46  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

mon  emanations  from  the  Absolute  One,  thus  in- 
dicating their  polytheistic  background.  But  as 
the  evolution  moved  on  the  relation  of  the  three 
became  more  pronounced  and  close.  The  under- 
lying pantheism  of  aU  Indian  philosophy  became 
the  uniting  element  in  the  new  Hindoo  triad. 
Brahma,  Vishnu,  and  Civa  ceased  to  be  equal 
gods  or  forms  of  one  god,  and  became  a  trinity 
in  co-relation  and  subordination,  though  the  pan- 
theistic element  still  ruled  it  and  merged  the 
three  together  in  one  common  divine  existence.  As 
this  more  complete  trinitarian  form  became  de- 
veloped, the  relations  of  the  three  members  of  the 
triad  were  changed,  and  also  the  order  of  subordi- 
nation. In  the  Purana  period  Vishnu  is  the  high- 
est and  supreme  god,  Civa  is  second,  unless  treated 
as  a  rival  of  Vishnu,  while  Brahma,  who  originally 
was  first  in  rank  and  authority,  falls  to  the  third 
place,  —  a  process  which  we  shall  see  again  and 
again  occurring  in  the  history  of  the  Ethnic  trini- 
ties, and  which  forms  a  curious  chapter  in  the  evo- 
lution of  the  Christian  trinitarianism.  In  the  final 
stage  of  Hindoo  trinitarian  development  its  pan- 
theism is  complete.  For  the  Vishnuite  Vishnu  is 
the  absolute  god,  and  the  other  two  members  of 
the  triad  are  merely  forms  or  names  of  Vishnu. 
The  same  is  true  of  Civa  for  the  Civaite.  In 
other  words,  Hindoo  trinitarianism  becomes  sec- 
tarian, and  it  is  such  a  sectarian  trinity  within 
whose  pantheistic  folds  the  two  great  Hindoo  sects 
have  managed  to  live  together  down  to  the  present 
day. 


THE  HINDOO  BRAHMANIC  TRINITY       47 

But,  thirdly,  the  most  remarkable  chapter  in 
the  evolution  of  the  Hindoo  trimurti  is  the  in- 
carnation of  Vishnu  in  the  form  of  Krishna,  the 
god-man.  The  idea  of  a  divine  incarnation  was 
not  new  in  Indian  thought.  It  is  a  fundamental 
element  of  aU  mythologies.  Gods  are  continually 
appearing  as  human  beings,  assuming  the  form  of 
a  man  or  woman,  or  even  for  the  time  personating 
some  actual  man  or  woman,  as,  in  the  Odyssey, 
Athene  assumed  the  form  of  Mentor,  and  went 
with  Telemachus  as  his  companion  to  the  court  of 
Nestor.  The  theory  of  transmigration  which  is  so 
embedded  in  Indian  thought  has  a  clear  affinity 
with  that  of  incarnation.  The  lines  between  the 
brute,  the  human,  and  the  divine  worlds,  between 
the  natural  and  the  supernatural,  were  not  sharply 
drawn  in  those  early  unscientific  times,  as  they 
are  to-day.  There  was  nothing  extraordinary  to 
the  Indian  thinker  any  more  than  to  the  Greek, 
in  the  descent  of  the  gods  to  companionship  with 
men,  and  in  the  assumption  of  human  guise.  He- 
brew thought  shows  traces  in  the  Old  Testament 
of  the  same  anthropomorphizing  tendency.  Abra- 
ham is  represented  as  entertaining  divine  beings, 
who  appeared  as  men  and  ate  at  his  table.  But 
the  Vishnu-Krishna  incarnation  doctrine  has  one 
peculiarity.  It  was  not  a  temporary  manifestation 
of  a  god  to  men  in  a  human  form.  It  was  a  per- 
manent incarnation  of  the  Absolute  Deity  in  a 
divine  man,  who  was  born,  and  lived,  and  died  like 
other  men.     These  incarnations  of   Vishnu  were 


48  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

indeed  repeated  according  to  human  needs,  but 
each  incarnation  was  a  true  birth  into  a  true  hu- 
man nature.  Krishna  thus  describes  it  in  the 
Bhagavat-Gita,  or  "  Divine  Song,"  to  his  friend 
Arjuna :  "  Many  births  of  mine  have  passed  away, 
O  Arjuna,  but  thou  hast  not  known  them. 
Though  I  am  unborn  and  of  essence  that  knoweth 
no  deterioration,  though  I  am  the  lord  of  creatures, 
still,  relying  on  my  own  nature,  I  take  birth  by 
my  own  powers  of  illusion.  Whensoever  loss  of 
piety  occurreth  and  the  rise  of  wickedness,  then 
do  I  create  myself.  For  the  'protection  of  the 
righteous^  for  the  destruction  of  evil-doers^  for 
the  sake  of  establishing  piety,  I  am  horn  age 
after  age^  The  Maha-bharata,  or  "  Great  Epic," 
represents  Krishna  as  "  born  of  a  woman,"  living 
an  active  human  life  among  men,  and  finally  as 
suffering  death  like  any  other  mortal.  Yet  in  the 
"  Divine  Song,"  which  is  included  iu  the  "  Great 
Epic,"  Krishna  again  and  again  speaks  in  the 
person  of  Vishnu,  describing  himself  as  the  "  Su- 
preme Being."  And  Arjuna  replying,  after  hav- 
ing been  allowed  a  vision  of  Vishnu  in  his  divine 
glory,  addresses  him,  "  I  bow  to  thee,  O  chief  of 
the  gods  ;  be  gracious  unto  me.  I  desire  to  know 
thee  that  art  the  primeval  one."  These  passages 
surely  remind  one  of  the  Christian  doctrine,  and 
irresistibly  force  on  the  Christian  historical  stu- 
dent the  question  whether  the  Hindoo  Vishnu- 
Krishna  incarnation  doctrine  is  not  borrowed  from 
Christianity  itself.     Some  Christian  scholars  have 


THE  HINDOO   BRAHMANIC  TRINITY        49 

held  to  this  view,  but  all  recent  investigations  have 
tended  more  and  more  strongly  to  the  opposite 
side,  and  to  my  mind  there  can  be  no  historical 
doubt  as  to  the  main  lines  of  fact.  Interpolation 
has  played  a  part  in  all  ancient  and  mediaeval 
literature.  This  is  especially  true  of  the  so-called 
sacred  books  of  the  world.  The  more  sacred  the 
writing,  the  stronger  the  temptation  to  make  addi- 
tions in  the  form  of  new  matter,  or  of  new  inter- 
pretation of  the  old.  The  Indian  sacred  books 
are  not  exceptional.  The  "  Great  Epic  "  is,  like 
the  Old  Testament  as  it  now  appears  in  Jewish 
literature,  the  result  of  many  recensions  involving 
growth  and  enlargement.  It  is  a  vast  compound 
of  myth,  legend,  history,  philosophy,  and  poetry, 
gathered  around  the  golden  age  of  Hindoo  tradi- 
tion. Whether  it  contains  any  real  historical  mat- 
ter is  doubtful.  Like  Homer,  it  is  mainly  a  com- 
pendium of  legendary  traditions.  These  traditions 
extend  back  into  the  origins  of  Indian  history,  and 
are  filled  with  the  true  Indian  spirit.  What  may 
be  called  the  first  edition  of  the  "  Great  Epic  "  as 
a  written  work  may  be  dated  certainly  as  early  as 
the  third  or  fourth  century  B.  c,  but  additions  con- 
tinued to  be  made  to  it  down  to  the  Christian  era, 
and  afterwards  on  to  the  sixth  century.  Of  course 
there  were  opportunities  for  later  borrowings  from 
the  growing  Christian  traditions ;  and  these  bor- 
rowings can  be  easily  discovered  by  plain  marks  of 
internal  evidence.  Some  of  these  are  drawn  from 
the  New  Testament  gospels,  and  others  are  copies 


60  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

in  spirit  if  not  in  the  exact  letter  of  the  legendary' 
apocryphal  lives  of  Christ.  But  the  nucleus  and 
substance  of  the  Vishnu-Krishna  incarnation  is 
just  as  surely  pre-Christian  and  of  native  Indian 
origin  as  the  Hindoo  Triad  itself.  It  bears  the 
clear  marks  of  Hindoo  genius  and  thought.  The 
differences  between  it  and  the  Christian  dogma, 
which  are  radical  and  essential,  while  the  resem- 
blances are  more  superficial,  though  startling  at 
first  sight,  —  a  matter  that  wiU  be  dealt  with 
more  fully  in  a  later  chapter,  —  clearly  indicate 
an  independent  origin.  One  general  point  of  dif- 
ference may  be  properly  mentioned  here,  since  it 
has  to  do  with  the  radical  character  of  the  Hindoo 
trinitarian  incarnation  doctrine,  as  compared  with 
all  other  like  dogmas,  whether  Ethnic  or  Chris- 
tian. The  most  notable  and  fundamental  differ- 
ence between  the  divine  incarnation  of  Krishna 
and  that  of  Jesus  consists  in  the  fact  that  Jesus 
was  a  real  man  with  a  veritable  human  life,  while 
Krishna  was  a  purely  mythical  being.  On  its  di- 
vine supernatural  side  the  Krishna  doctrine  quite 
agrees  with  the  Christian,  but  it  utterly  fails  on 
the  human  side.  In  other  words,  the  Christian 
doctrine  of  the  divine  incarnation,  as  it  was  evolved 
in  the  early  church,  had  its  starting-point  and 
centre  in  a  historical  personage,  namely,  Jesus  of 
Nazareth,  whereas  the  Indian  doctrine  is  whoUy  a 
growth  of  Indian  speculative  thought,  and  has  no 
element  of  historical  fact  to  bring  it  into  closer 
relation  with  actual  human  life.     Thus  these  two 


THE  HINDOO  BRAHMANIC    TRINITY       51 

different  modes  of  conception  illustrate  the  two 
general  classes  of  incarnation  theory  into  which 
all  such  theories  may  be  divided:  (1)  the  class 
which  starts  with  deity,  and  by  an  incarnation  re- 
duces deity  to  humanity;  (2)  the  class  which 
starts  with  a  real  human  being  and  raises  him  to 
the  rank  of  deity,  and  then  accounts  for  his  human 
nature  by  an  incarnation  of  his  deity.  Vishnu- 
KJrishna  is  an  illustration  of  the  first  class.  AU 
purely  mythological  incarnations  are  of  this  class. 
According  to  Darmesteter,  the  Avestan  scholar, 
Zoroaster  was  not  a  real  historical  man  who  was 
afterwards  divinized  by  his  later  disciples,  but  a 
mythological  creation  who  became  incarnate  in  the 
Persian  theology.  If  this  were  true,  Zoroaster 
would  belong  to  the  same  class  with  Vishnu- 
Krishna.  The  second  class  is  represented  by  the 
Christ  of  Christian  orthodoxy,  the  result  of  a  his- 
torical evolution,  which  has  been  unfolded  in  my 
previous  volume,  "A  Critical  History,"  etc.  In 
this  case  a  real  man  was  divinized,  and  then  a  doc- 
trine of  incarnation  was  developed  to  account  for 
the  presence  of  God  in  the  flesh  among  men.  The 
same  is  true  of  Zoroaster,  if  the  view  of  West, 
Mills,  and  others,  be  taken,  —  the  view  which 
plainly  best  accords  with  the  most  ancient  of 
Avestan  texts,  —  namely,  that  Zoroaster  is  to  be 
regarded  as  a  Persian  sage  and  prophet,  who  ap- 
peared as  a  reformer  and  founded  a  new  religion, 
and  was  afterwards  divinized  into  a  god  and  wor- 
shiped.     Then   naturally   followed  the   tradition 


62  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

of  his  miraculous  birth  and  divine  incarnation. 
To  the  same  class  belongs  Buddlia  in  the  later 
Buddhist  religion.  All  efforts  to  turn  the  life  of 
Gautama  into  a  myth  have  signally  failed.  Ideal- 
ized as  that  life  became  in  the  growth  of  tradition, 
so  that  it  is  difficult  to  separate  fact  from  legend, 
the  outlines  of  a  true  historical  person  stand  out 
too  distinctly  to  give  any  foothold  for  critical 
skepticism.  The  historical  Buddha  was  a  real 
man  with  a  human  biography,  as  I  have  already 
described  it ;  but  after  ages  developed  around 
his  life  and  name  a  series  of  divine  Buddhas  or 
incarnations  of  deity,  of  whom  the  historical  Gau- 
tama, "  the  enlightened  one,"  or  Buddha,  was  one. 
A  clear  distinction  should  be  drawn  here  be- 
tween all  incarnation  theories  and  those  mediation 
ideas  which  we  have  found  so  characteristic  of  the 
various  Ethnic  trinities.  All  incarnation  theories 
are  based  on  the  mediation  principle,  but  a  fuU 
mediation  trinitarian  doctrine  does  not  necessarily 
involve  the  incarnation  of  a  god  into  humanity, 
and  in  fact  it  was  not  included  in  most  of  the 
Ethnic  religions,  even  where  the  mediation  princi- 
ple was  quite  fully  developed,  as,  for  example,  in 
the  Platonic  philosophy.  Plato  introduced  the 
mediation  element  into  his  dualistic  transcenden- 
talism. Philo  developed  out  of  Plato  his  Logos 
doctrine,  and  gave  to  the  Logos  the  name  of  medi- 
ator, using  the  word  /xco-rny?  which  afterwards  went 
into  the  Christian  vocabulary.  But  the  Greek 
mediation  doctrine  never  reached   any  theory  of 


THE  HINDOO  BRAHMANIC  TRINITY        53 

incarnation.  The  Sot/xwi/  of  Plato  and  the  /Aco-trr;?  of 
Philo  always  remained  supernatural  divine  beings. 
Even  Plotinus  refused  to  borrow  such  a  material- 
istic doctrine,  as  he  would  have  termed  it,  from 
Christianity.  His  profoundly  trinitarian  mediation 
system  was  completely  idealistic  and  speculative, 
and  introduced  no  element  either  from  mythology 
or  history.  In  this  respect  Christianity  and  Hin- 
dooism  including  Buddhism  stand  apart  from  all 
other  religions,  and  it  is  this  fact  that  gives  the 
Vishnu-Krishna  doctrine  such  significance  in  the 
history  of  the  Ethnic  trinities.  This  doctrine  is 
essentially  the  principle  of  a  divine  mediatorship 
acting  between  God  and  men,  in  the  interest  of 
human  well-being,  carried  out  to  its  completest 
limit.  Divine  condescension  could  go  no  further 
than  to  lead  a  god  to  enter  the  human  condition  and 
to  live  a  real  human  life  from  birth  to  death,  enter- 
ing life  and  leaving  it  in  a  true  human  way.  This 
is  the  simple  meaning  of  the  Krishna  myth.  It 
was  the  last  and  highest  word  of  Indian  religious 
philosophy  on  the  mystery  of  the  moral  relation  be- 
tween God  and  man.  It  taught  that  the  Absolute 
Deity  was  in  closest  intimacy  with  humanity,  that 
human  moral  necessities  and  cravings  for  a  moral 
salvation  were  aU  met  and  satisfied  in  a  divine 
movement  of  God  towards  his  creatures  which  in- 
volved, when  the  situation  demanded,  a  real  incar- 
nation of  God  in  the  flesh,  bringing  him  into  the 
closest  possible  nearness  to  the  objects  of  his  love, 
so  that  they  could  see  him  somehow  as  he  is,  and 


64  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

believe  on  him  to  the  saving  of  the  soul.  A  single 
passage  from  the  "  Divine  Song "  well  illustrates 
the  spirit  of  Hindooism  in  its  purest  form.  Krishna 
thus  discloses  to  his  friend  Arjuna  the  ef&cacy  of 
faith  in  himself :  "  Fix  thy  heart  on  me  alone,  place 
thy  understanding  on  me.  Hereafter  then  shalt 
thou  dwell  in  me.  Exceedingly  dear  art  thou  to 
me,  therefore  I  wiU  declare  what  is  for  thy  bene- 
fit. Forsaking  all  religious  duties,  come  to  me  as 
the  sole  refuge ;  I  will  deliver  thee  from  all  sins." 
How  strongly  like  this  is  to  the  Fourth  Gospel  I 
need  not  say.  But,  as  we  shall  see,  such  sen- 
timents are  not  peculiar  to  the  "  Divine  Song  "  or 
the  Fourth  Gospel.  They  are  the  deep  spiritual 
utterances  of  a  common  humanity,  and  have  been 
repeated  again  and  again  in  the  history  of  religion. 
Nor  is  it  so  wonderful  that  this  lofty  speculation 
should  have  been  reached  by  Indian  sages,  when 
we  realize  the  conditions  under  which  they  wrought. 
No  historical  people  in  the  world,  perhaps,  can  be 
compared  with  the  Hindoos  in  the  region  of  ab- 
stract religious  thought.  Even  Greek  philosophy 
seems  superficial  and  crude  when  put  into  close 
critical  comparison  with  the  philosophy  of  India. 
It  must  be  remembered  that  recent  philological 
science  has  discovered  the  clear  bond  of  tribal  and 
linguistic  relationship  between  India  and  Greece, 
and  also  the  clear  indication  that  the  Indian  civi- 
lization and  literature  are  much  the  older  of  the 
two.  The  Vedas  were  written  before  Homer  sang, 
and  the  Brahman  pliilosophers  discussed  the  nature 


THE  HINDOO  BRAHMANIC  TRINITY       65 

of  God  and  the  soul  before  Thales  developed  his 
crude  theory  that  all  nature  originated  from  water, 
or  Anaxagoras  suggested  that  behind  all  mixed 
phenomena  there  must  be  something  unmixed  and 
self-moved  which  he  called  the  soul  of  things. 
There  is  good  ground  for  believing  that  Pythagoras 
and  Heracleitus  owed  some  of  their  philosophical 
ideas  to  India.  Not  till  we  come  in  Greek  thought 
to  Plotinus  and  the  later  New  Platonists  do  we  find 
a  development  of  philosophical  speculation  that  in 
metaphysical  acuteness  and  profundity  rivals  the 
sectarian  schools  of  the  Hindoo  trinitarianism.  The 
people  of  India  have  been  from  the  earliest  histori- 
cal times  on  the  whole  the  most  intensely  religious 
and  religiously  thoughtful  people  in  the  world. 
Their  literature  illustrates  this.  There  is  no  his- 
tory or  science  therein  in  the  modem  sense.  It 
all  belongs  to  the  sphere  of  ethics  and  religion. 
Buddha,  the  consummate  flower  of  Indian  thought 
and  life,  was  a  religious  reformer  and  saint,  and  he 
remains  to-day  one  of  the  most  striking  religious 
figures  in  the  calendar  of  the  world's  noblest  and 
loftiest  spirits.  It  is  not  so  strange,  then,  that  such 
a  redemptive  incarnation  theory  should  have  arisen 
in  Indian  theology. 

From  what  has  been  said  it  is  plain  that  the 
Tnediation  idea  rules  above  all  others  in  the  Hin- 
doo trinitarianism,  and  culminates  in  the  divine 
incarnation  of  Vishnu  in  the  form  of  Krishna, 
who  appears  as  the  divine-human  friend  and  helper 
of  man.     The  precursor  of  this  phase  of  doctrine, 


66  THE  ETHNIC   TRINITIES 

in  Indian  religious  tradition,  as  we  have  seen,  was 
Agni,  a  member  of  an  early  Hindoo  trinity,  namely, 
Varuna,  Indra,  and  Agni.  But  Agni  was  never 
incarnate  as  a  human  being.  His  mediatorship 
never  reached  the  point  of  his  humbling  himself 
and  submitting  to  a  human  birth  and  even  to  a 
human  death.  But  this  further  step  in  the  medi- 
atorial office  was  natural  and  historically  involved, 
and  the  theological  movement  from  Agni  to  Vishnu- 
Krishna  was  along  the  lines  not  only  of  specula- 
tive logic,  but  of  the  religious  intuitions.  If  God 
and  man  are  morally  related,  and  yet  are  meta- 
physically separated  in  two  diverse  spheres  of  be- 
ing, the  truest  union  between  them  can  be  brought 
about  only  by  an  incarnation  of  the  higher  being 
into  the  fleshly  nature  of  the  lower,  and  the  Hin- 
doo Brahman  reached  this  conclusion  by  the  same 
road  as  Athanasias,  when  he  wrote :  "  God  must 
be  made  man  in  order  that  man  may  be  made 
God,"  that  is,  may  be  brought  into  completest  spir- 
itual unity  with  him.  One  step  only  remained  to 
be  taken  to  exhaust  this  whole  cycle  of  religious 
thought,  namely,  that  the  subject  of  incarnation 
should  be  an  actual  historical  human  personage. 
But  this  was  scarcely  possible  from  the  Hindoo 
point  of  view.  The  Vishnu-Krishna  doctrine  and 
its  trinitarian  accompaniment  had  their  historical 
source  in  the  Vedic  polytheistic  mythology.  But 
mythology  and  history  do  not  easily  mix,  or  rather 
it  might  better  be  said,  they  mix  so  easily  that  the 
mythological  carries  the  historical  with  it,  so  that 


THE  HINDOO  BRAHMANIC  TRINITY        57 

to  the  Hindoo  thinker  Krishna  was  as  truly  a  his- 
torical character  as  Komiilus  was  to  the  Koman,  or 
Adam  to  the  Hebrew.  The  myth  was  in  their  eyes 
as  much  fact  as  any  event  of  history.  In  short, 
there  is  no  need  of  a  historical  incarnation  of  an 
actual  man  from  the  mythological  or  ideal  stand- 
point. Myth  or  legend  has  become  history  for  all 
practical  purposes.  A  reversal  of  this  process  must 
spring  from  the  opposite  quarter,  namely,  from  a 
real  human  person  who  from  sainthood  is  evolved 
into  divinity  and  then  is  raised  into  a  preexistent 
heavenly  condition  to  become  incarnate.  It  is  cer- 
tainly remarkable  that  in  Indian  history,  where  a 
mythological  and  philosophic  idealism  so  thoroughly 
rules,  a  signal  illustration  should  be  furnished  of 
an  incarnation  doctrine  based  on  a  historical  back- 
ground. I  refer  to  the  case  of  Buddha  and  Bud- 
dhism. What  makes  this  case  the  more  remarkable 
is  the  fact  that  Buddhism  is  not  a  dogmatic  re- 
volt from  earlier  Yedistic  or  Brahmanic  ideas.  It 
is  simply  a  chapter  in  the  history  of  the  Hindoo 
religion,  —  a  new  effort  along  old  lines  to  solve  the 
mystery  of  human  life  and  salvation,  a  wholly  ethi- 
cal reform,  made  vital,  indeed,  by  the  holy  life  and 
character  of  Buddha  himself.  But  just  here  is  to 
be  found  the  true  and  easy  explanation  of  what 
seems  at  first  sight  so  difficult  of  solution.  The 
vital  force  of  Buddhism  lay  in  the  person  and  per- 
sonal life  of  its  founder.  The  new  religion  gath- 
ered itself  around  the  man  Gautama.  The  first 
and  easy  step  of  religious  evolution  was  to  make 


68  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

this  saint  among  men  a  superhuman  being,  and 
finally  an  incarnation  of  the  Absolute  God.  Such 
was  the  historical  starting-point  in  the  evolution  of 
dogmatic  Buddhism  and  its  doctrine  of  numerous 
divine  incarnations  in  men  like  Gautama. 

It  is  interesting  here  to  note  that  in  the  history 
of  the  Buddha  doctrine  and  cult  we  have  the  only 
clear  and  complete  historical  counterpart  to  that 
of  dogmatic  Christianity.  The  Vishnu-Krishna 
doctrine,  as  we  have  seen,  lacks  one  radical  point 
of  resemblance,  in  that  it  rests  on  no  historical 
footing.  But  this  lack  is  supplied  by  Buddhism. 
It  is  in  India,  then,  that  we  find  a  thoroughly  de- 
veloped dogma  of  a  historical  incarnation  of  God 
in  a  real  human  nature,  closely  analogous  to  the 
Christian  dogma,  yet  chronologically  anterior  by 
hundreds  of  years,  so  that  if  there  was  any  bor- 
rowing it  must  have  been  on  the  Christian  side. 
Of  this,  however,  there  is  no  proof,  and  there  are 
differences,  both  in  historical  origin  and  in  inter- 
nal evolution  and  character,  which  stamp  both 
as  wholly  distinct  and  independent  types  of  that 
common  mediation  idea  which  is  as  old  and  uni- 
versal as  the  human  race.  It  is  this  need  so  deep 
in  human  nature  of  some  mediator  or  mediating 
movement  between  God  and  man  that  unites  all 
religions  together,  whether  Ethnic  or  Christian, 
however  distinguishable  in  other  respects.  Every 
religious  faith,  as  a  rule,  rests  at  last  on  a  medi- 
ating principle  by  which  man  may  climb  to  God, 
be  it  Marduk,  or  Agni,  or  Athene,  or  Zoroaster,  or 


THE  HINDOO  BRAHMANIC  TRINITY        69 

Mithra,  or  Sosiosh,  or  Krishna,  or  Buddha,  or  the 
"Word"  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  or  the  "tpvxn"  of 
Plotinus. 

The  question  might  be  raised  whether  the  Jew- 
ish and  Mohammedan  religions  are  not  exceptions 
to  this  rule.  It  is  true  that  these  two  religions  — 
both  Semitic,  and  having  the  same  original  char- 
acter, as  reactions  from  polytheistic  beliefs  —  agree 
in  rejecting  all  distinctly  trinitarian  forms  of  di- 
vinity. The  stark  monotheism  of  these  religions 
prevents  any  such  tendency;  but  it  is  far  from 
true  that  they  lack  all  mediational  features.  Juda- 
ism made  much  of  the  mediatorship  of  Moses. 
Paul,  himself  a  Jew,  declared  that  the  Jews  re- 
ceived the  law  from  God  at  the  hands  of  a  /tco-mys 
or  mediator,  referring  to  Moses.  The  Mosaic  law 
itseK  was  regarded  as  of  divine  origin  and  nature, 
and  the  worship  therein  enjoined,  first  in  the  tab- 
ernacle and  afterwards  in  the  temple,  was  made 
the  medium  of  communication  between  the  wor- 
shipers and  Jehovah.  It  is  true  that  Moses 
himself  was  never  deified;  but  his  Law,  and  the 
Temple,  and  the  Temple  cultus  with  the  sacrificial 
system,  became  veritable  mediators  between  the 
people  and  God.  It  was  on  the  basis  of  their  rela- 
tion to  the  Law  and  the  Temple  that  they  regarded 
themselves  as  the  chosen  people  of  God,  while  aU 
the  heathen  were  disowned  and  cast  away  from  his 
favor.  The  case  is  much  the  same  with  Moham- 
medanism. Mohammed  only  proclaimed  himself 
a  prophet  like  Moses,  and  his  followers  have  never 


60  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

treated  him  as  more  than  man.  Yet  a  principle 
of  mediation  between  them  and  Allah  was  estab- 
lished in  the  view  taken  of  the  Koran,  which  they 
regard  as  a  verbally  inspired  communication  given 
to  Mohammed  directly  from  God,  and  so  the  chief 
means  of  obtaining  the  divine  favor.  The  Koran 
has  become  the  great  Mohammedan  fetich,  though 
some  account  must  also  be  made  of  the  Caaba,  or 
temple,  at  Mecca,  with  its  legendary  traditions 
and  consequent  superstitions,  such  as  the  directing 
of  aU  prayer  toward  Mecca,  as  if  God  would  hear 
and  answer  his  worshipers  only  from  that  sacred 
spot.  The  forms  of  mediation  in  these  religions 
certainly  differ  considerably  from  those  of  other 
religions,  but  the  mediation  principle,  as  a  way  of 
satisfying  the  religious  needs  of  men,  is  found 
equally  in  them. 

It  was  Christ,  if  the  testimony  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel  may  be  accepted,  who  first  promulgated  in 
its  sharpest  form  what  may  be  historically  called 
the  Protestant  doctrine,  that  no  eternal  mediation 
of  any  sort  is  required  between  man  and  his  Maker, 
and  that  every  human  being  may  directly  approach 
God  and  commune  with  him  face  to  face,  when  he 
said :  "  The  hour  cometh,  when  ye  shall  neither  in 
this  mountain,  nor  yet  at  Jerusalem,  worship  the 
Father,"  "  God  is  a  spirit,  and  they  that  worship 
him  must  worship  him  in  spirit,"  that  is,  not 
through  outward  mediational  forms,  or  in  any  par- 
ticular place,  but  directly  anywhere  and  every- 
where, with  no  bar  between  that  needs  to  be  re- 


THE  HINDOO  BRAHMANIC  TRINITY        61 

moved  by  any  human  or  divine  mediator.  Christ 
taught  the  same  doctrine  more  authentically  in  his 
parable  of  the  prodigal  son,  where  the  erring  peni- 
tent returns  on  his  homeward  way  and  meets  his 
father  face  to  face.  Paul,  too,  had  recognized, 
though  perhaps  less  clearly,  the  same  royal  truth, 
when  he  declared  that  "  God  dwelleth  not  in  tem- 
ples made  with  hands,  and  is  not  far  from  any  one 
of  us,"  "  for  we  are  also  his  offspring."  But  so 
spiritual  a  vision  was  not  easily  discoverable  by 
men,  and  remained  for  ages  the  far  off  Holy  Grail 
of  himian  search  and  hope.  None  of  the  Ethnic 
religions  quite  reached  it.  Only  now  and  then 
has  some  single  solitary  thinker,  in  some  inspired 
moment  of  religious  meditation,  caught  sight  of  it 
and  left  it  to  shine  a  lone  star  in  literature.  Such 
was  Seneca  when  he  wrote  :  "  It  is  not  necessary 
to  raise  the  hands  to  heaven,  nor  to  ask  the  temple 
keeper  to  admit  us  to  the  ears  of  a  divinity,  as  if 
we  could  then  be  better  heard.  God  is  near  to 
you,  he  is  with  you,  even  within  you ;  yes,  I  may 
say  that  the  Holy  Spirit  has  its  seat  within  us  " 
(Sacer  intra  nos  spiritus  sedet.  Ep.  41,  ad  Lucil.), 
—  words  that  remind  us  at  once  of  Paul's  in  the 
passage  just  quoted  from  his  address  on  Mars  HiU 
in  Athens,  and  make  less  surprising  the  tradition 
that  these  two  men  met  and  afterwards  had  a  cor- 
respondence which  has  come  down  to  us.  It  is 
needless  to  say  that  the  so-caUed  "  Letters  of  Paul 
and  Seneca  "  are  whoUy  spurious.  But  this  fact 
lies  behind  them,  namely,  that  man's  moral  con- 


62  THE  ETHNIC   TRINITIES 

sciousness  may  anywhere  and  at  any  time  so  open 
itself  to  the  divine  incoming  and  presence  that  no 
vail  shall  remain  to  hide  God's  face,  and  no  medi- 
ator be  needed  to  bring  him  near  to  us.  Such 
foregleams  of  truth,  however,  have  been  rare.  Job 
is  described  as  "  a  man  of  God  ; "  yet  he  prayed  : 
"  O  that  I  might  know  where  I  could  find  him." 
Plato  was  the  perfect  flower  of  Greek  philosophy, 
yet  he  wrote :  "  God  is  hard  to  find,  and  when 
found  is  difficult  to  make  known  to  others."  Ten- 
nyson, who  voiced,  perhaps,  beyond  all  others  the 
religious  aspirations  and  acquisitions  of  our  mod- 
ern world,  was  a  true  prophet  and  seer  when  he 
sang :  — 

"  I  hold  it  true  with  him  who  sings 
To  one  clear  harp  in  divers  tones, 
That  men  may  rise  on  stepping  stones 
Of  their  dead  selves  to  higher  things.^' 

Such  "  stepping  stones,"  indeed,  are  the  divine 
revelations  given  in  the  successive  stages  of  the 
history  of  religion,  — "  The  world's  great  altar 
stairs  that  slope  through  darkness  up  to  God." 
That  vision  of  spiritual  truth  which  Christ  caught 
with  such  wonderful  clearness,  and  which  Paul 
and  Seneca  had  glimpses  of,  needed  for  its  fuller 
comprehension  those  fuller  revealings  of  God  in 
the  wonderful  discoveries  in  science  and  history 
of  the  last  fifty  years.  Surely  the  writer  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  builded  better  than  he 
knew,  when  he  wrote :  "  God,  who  at  sundry  times 
and  in  divers  manners   spake  in  time  past  unto 


THE  HINDOO  BRAHMANIC  TRINITY        63 

the  fathers  by  the  prophets,"  "hath  provided 
some  better  thing  for  us,  that  they  without  us 
should  not  he  made  perfect.''  How  far  short  of 
the  real  truth,  as  seen  in  the  light  of  later  his- 
tory, did  this  writer  come  ?  For  him,  plainly,  the 
"  end  of  days  "  was  near  at  hand.  Comparing  the 
dispensation  of  the  prophets  with  the  messianic 
teachings  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  he  was  fully  as- 
sured that  the  new  dispensation  was  ushering  in 
the  grand  consummation  of  mundane  events. 
How  little  did  he  realize  that  the  gospel  which 
Christ  had  proclaimed  was  itself  only  a  seed  which 
nineteen  long  centuries  would  quicken  and  unfold, 
until  in  another  "  end  of  days "  a  new  epoch 
would  be  reached  of  higher  and  grander  revela- 
tions, itself  in  turn  to  be  succeeded  "  at  sundry 
times  and  in  divers  manners  "  by  still  wider  and 
more  splendid  displays  of  the  Divine  beneficence ; 
for  even  "  we  "  in  these  far  ojff  last  times  have  not 
yet  been  "  made  perfect." 


CHAPTER  V 

THE  PERSIAN  ZOROASTRIAN  TRINITARIANISM 

The  Persian  religion  is  closely  connected  with 
the  Indian  in  origin  and  early  character.  These 
peoples  not  only  had  a  common  Aryan  ancestry, 
but  their  historical  traditions  indicate  a  common 
migration  from  their  original  home,  and  a  subse- 
quent division  into  two  bodies  in  their  movement 
southward,  from  which  resulted  two  distinct  nations. 
In  the  dim  prehistoric  backgTound  of  Zoroastrian- 
ism  there  are  traces  of  a  polytheism  which  bears 
plain  marks  of  affinity  with  the  Vedic  polytheism 
of  India.  Zoroaster  himself,  if  he  was  a  historical 
and  not  a  mythical  character,  as  on  the  whole 
seems  the  best  supported  view,  was  a  reformer 
of  the  ancient  religion  in  the  direction  of  mon- 
otheism. Zoroastrianism  has  usually  been  treated 
as  if  based  on  a  thorough  philosophical  dualism, 
and  as  representing  in  an  extreme  form  the  dual- 
istic  theory  of  the  origin  of  the  universe,  namely, 
that  the  present  system  of  things,  with  its  mixture 
of  good  and  evil,  is  the  result  of  the  action  of  two 
original,  eternal,  and  independent  principles,  one 
good  and  the  author  of  all  good,  the  other  evil  and 
the  author  of  all  evil.  There  is  a  single  short 
passage  in  the  Gathas  which  seems  to  teach  this 


PERSIAN  ZOROASTRIAN  TRINITARIANISM    65 

view.  But  even  the  Gathas  were  not  free  from 
interpolation.  Mr.  L.  H.  Mills,  the  Avestan 
scholar,  in  his  introduction  to  the  Gathas,  says : 
"  We  may  say,  a  priori,  that  all  existing  composi- 
tions of  antiquity  are  and  must  have  been  interpo- 
lated," —  a  statement  which  seems  somewhat  start- 
ling, but  which  all  historical  investigators  must 
accept  as  substantially  true.  Mr.  Mills  adds  that 
there  are  "  less  interpolations  in  the  Gathas  than 
is  usual."  The  Gathas  in  the  Avestan  sacred 
writings  correspond  to  the  Synoptic  gospels  of  the 
New  Testament.  Mr.  Mills  regards  the  interpo- 
lations in  the  Gathas  as  "the  work  of  Zoroaster's 
earliest  disciples."  There  was  a  decided  tendency 
from  the  first,  undoubtedly,  in  the  Zoroastrian  re- 
ligion towards  a  dualistic  doctrine,  and  it  became 
fuUy  developed  in  the  later  Zoroastrianism ;  but 
it  never  reached  the  point  of  extreme  dualism,  as 
was  the  case  in  Christian  Gnosticism,  which  bor- 
rowed its  dualistic  principle  from  Zoroastrian 
sources,  but  converted  it  into  something  quite  differ- 
ent from  the  doctrine  of  Zoroaster  himself  or  even 
of  his  true  followers.  Zoroaster  was  a  practical 
reformer,  not  a  speculator,  and  his  reform  was  di- 
rected mainly  against  polytheism,  especially  in  the 
form  of  the  worship  of  evil  spirits.  This  seems  to 
have  led  him  to  the  assertion  of  a  monotheistic 
doctrine.  Ormuzd  was  the  one  eternal  good  god, 
surrounded  by  subordinate  good  beings.  A  good 
god  cannot  be  responsible  for  the  existence  of 
evil.     Such  evil  cannot  be  imputed  to  Ormuzd's 


66  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

agency  or  permission.  Whence,  then,  comes  evil? 
The  Zoroastrian  treated  it  as  connected  with  "  the 
imperfection  that  is  inherent  in  the  nature  of 
things."  Out  of  this  inherent  imperfection  sprang 
the  kingdom  of  evil  beings  with  Ahriman  at  their 
head,  ever  at  war  with  Ormuzd  and  his  kingdom 
of  good.  In  this  way  arose  the  dual  character  of 
the  world  and  of  man.  A  dualism  of  this  kind  is 
consistent  with  a  monotheistic  doctrine,  and  is  not 
far  from  the  doctrine  of  Christ  and  of  Paul,  not  to 
speak  of  the  Jews  after  the  exile,  who  had  drawn 
much  of  their  new  theology  from  their  Persian 
neighbors.  Such  a  monotheistic  dualism  seems  to 
have  been  the  basis  of  Zoroaster's  reform.  When 
one  seeks  to  scan  more  closely  the  details  of  Zoro- 
aster's career,  and  to  gain  a  clear  picture  of  his 
life,  the  path  of  the  historical  scholar  is  beset  at 
once  with  difficulties.  If  the  critic's  task  is  diffi- 
cult in  the  case  of  Buddha,  it  is  much  more  so  in 
the  case  of  Zoroaster.  While  I  am  ready  on  the 
whole  to  agree  with  Mills  and  West  against  the 
brilliant  and  trenchant  criticism  of  Darmesteter,  it 
must  be  avowed  that  the  effort  to  separate  even  a 
few  grains  of  historical  truth  from  the  mass  of 
legendary  additions  is  well-nigh  ineffectual.  But 
if  a  full  picture  of  Zoroaster  cannot  be  portrayed, 
at  least  the  rough  outlines  of  his  life  are  plainly 
discernible  through  all  the  mists  and  shadows  of 
legendary  tradition. 

Here  as  everywhere  in  historical  research  the 
law  of  evolution  comes  to  our  aid.     The  canonical 


PERSIAN  ZOROASTRIAN  TRINITARIANISM    67 

Avestan  books,  which  are  our  chief  authorities  for 
what  can  be  known  of  Zoroaster,  were  written  at 
various  periods.  The  exact  dates  cannot  be  given. 
The  date  of  Zoroaster  himself  is  wholly  conjec- 
tural, —  the  estimates  of  Avestan  scholars  ranging 
from  the  fifteenth  century  b.  c.  to  the  seventh 
century  b.  c.  Haug  ascribes  the  Gathas,  the 
earliest  of  the  Avestan  scriptures,  to  the  twelfth 
century  B.  c,  the  Vendidad  to  the  tenth,  the  later 
Yasna  to  the  eighth,  and  the  Yahsts,  the  latest  of 
them,  to  the  fifth.  This  estimate  allows  about 
eight  hundred  years  for  the  completion  of  the 
Avesta,  —  a  period  which  Haug  regards  as  "  rather 
too  short  than  too  long."  Whatever  view  be  taken 
as  to  the  correctness  of  these  dates,  they  go  to 
illustrate  the  fact  of  the  length  of  the  historical 
evolution  which  was  involved  in  the  growth  and 
final  collection  of  the  writings  known  as  the  Zend- 
Avesta.  But  the  evolution  did  not  stop  here.  It 
is  continued  a  half  millennium  later  in  the  great 
Zoroastrian  revival  under  the  Sassanian  dynasty, 
when  the  Pahlavi  translations  and  commentaries 
were  published.  What  opportunity  was  offered  dur- 
ing so  long  a  stretch  of  years  for  interpolations 
and  legendary  growth  is  easily  seen.  The  question 
now  arises :  What  was  the  law  of  evolution  in  the 
course  of  these  twelve  to  fifteen  centuries  ?  Darmes- 
teter  puts  it  thus  :  "  The  question  is  whether  Zoro- 
aster was  a  man  converted  into  a  god,  or  a  god 
converted  into  a  man,"  We  have  seen  how  Darmes- 
teter  himself  decided  it,     He  regarded  the  Zoro- 


68  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

aster  story  as  purely  mythical.  But  the  more  con- 
servative view  seems  to  best  fit  the  course  of  devel- 
opment as  given  in  the  Avesta  itself,  namely,  that 
a  historical  man  became  the  subject  of  a  legendary 
evolution  which  finally  invested  him  with  semi- 
divine  attributes  and  functions.  If  we  begin  with 
the  oldest  Avestan  book,  the  Gathas,  the  picture  of 
Zoroaster  there  given,  though  only  in  incidental 
touches,  is  thoroughly  human,  with  no  suggestion 
of  divine  functions.  He  first  appears  as  a  reformer 
and  prophet,  becomes  a  preacher  of  a  purer  faith 
in  God  to  his  countrymen,  converts  many,  includ- 
ing the  king,  to  his  doctrines,  and  thus  founds  a 
new  reformed  religion.  In  this  work  no  super- 
natural agencies  are  employed.  No  miracles  are 
wrought.  Zoroaster  is  born  in  the  natural  way  and 
dies  a  natural  death.  There  is,  however,  a  single 
hint  of  what  is  to  come.  The  religious  proclama- 
tions of  Zoroaster  are  declared  to  be  prophetic 
and  inspired.  He  is  a  true  priest  of  God,  and 
his  words  are  divinely  revealed  and  authoritative. 
Thus  we  are  prepared  for  subsequent  legendary 
additions.  The  scene  soon  changes  as  we  pro- 
ceed to  the  later  books.  Zoroaster's  birth  becomes 
miraculous.  Zoroaster  himself  becomes  a  miracle- 
worker,  and  a  supernatural  atmosphere  more  and 
more  surrounds  him.  Instead  of  being  a  human 
reformer,  he  appears  as  a  divinely  sent  messiah 
and  mediator  armed  with  divine  power,  and  finally 
is  raised  to  the  rank  of  a  demi-god.  This  corrup- 
tion of  the  original  tradition  marks  a  return  to  the 


PERSIAN  ZOROASTRIAN  TRINITARIANISM    69 

earlier  polytheism  against  which  Zoroaster  himself 
had  protested.  The  new  ethical  monotheism  which 
he  had  preached  yielded  to  polytheistic  tendencies, 
and  the  doctrine  of  evil  spirits  resumed  its  old 
sway.  The  so-called  dualism  of  the  later  Avestan 
and  post-Avestan  Zoroastrian  books  is  really  a 
polytheism  of  the  most  rigid  sort,  colored  to  a 
deeper  dye  by  the  dualistic  principle,  though  the 
whole  doctrine  is  redeemed  from  utter  dualistic 
pessimism  by  its  eschatology,  which  proclaims  the 
final  triumph  of  good  and  the  everlasting  destruc- 
tion of  evil. 

The  remarkable  resemblances  between  events  in 
the  life  of  Zoroaster  and  similar  events  in  the  Hfe 
of  Christ  have  attracted  the  attention  of  Christian 
scholars.  Like  resemblances  have  already  been 
noted  by  us  in  the  account  of  Buddha.  No  doubt 
some  of  the  more  superficially  striking  resem- 
blances are  due  to  a  post-Christian  borrowing  in 
the  later  stages  of  historical  evolution.  But  such 
borrowing  cannot  account  for  those  features  of 
likeness  which  are  after  all  most  radical  and  con- 
spicuous. And  if  this  is  clearly  true  in  the  case 
of  Buddha,  as  we  have  seen,  much  more  is  it  true 
beyond  all  doubt  and  controversy  in  the  case  of 
Zoroaster.  The  Avestan  writings  were  completed 
some  centuries  before  the  Christian  era,  and  the 
evolution  of  the  Zoroastrian  tradition  was  original 
and  independent  of  foreign  influences.  The  most 
remarkable  coincidences  in  the  lives  of  Zoroaster, 
Buddha,  and  Christ  are  explainable  in  the  same 


70  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

way  that  so  many  coincidences  of  every  kind  in 
history,  in  legend,  and  in  folk-lore  are  explained. 
Our  present  studies  are  seeking  to  explain  by  the 
same  critical  historical  process  the  remarkable  co- 
incidences in  the  trinitarian  ideas  of  so  many 
ancient  peoples,  where  the  theory  of  borrowing 
either  direct  or  indirect  is  absolutely  impossible. 
The  case  is  the  same  with  individual  lives  as  with 
whole  peoples.  Legend  works  in  the  same  way  in 
both  cases.  Take,  for  example,  one  of  the  most 
striking  incidents  in  the  lives  of  Zoroaster,  Buddha, 
and  Christ,  —  the  temptation  by  the  evil  spirit.  In 
all  three  cases  this  temptation  occurs  at  the  most 
critical  period  in  their  careers,  the  character  of 
the  temptation  is  essentially  the  same,  and  the 
tempter  is  the  same  wicked  spirit  of  evil.  The 
superficial  incidents  in  the  three  accounts  vary, 
but  the  radical  elements  of  the  transaction  are  the 
same.  What  need  of  resorting  to  the  theory  of 
borrowing  when  the  evidence  is  whoUy  against  it  ? 
Human  nature  and  human  Hfe  are  essentially  the 
same  in  their  exhibitions  in  all  mankind.  A  great 
temptation  is  inherent  in  the  very  nature  of  things 
as  a  component  part  of  a  great  character  and 
career.  Similar  temptations  by  the  Devil  are  to 
be  found  in  other  lives.  Demonology  has  played 
an  immense  part  in  legendary  history.  The  hves 
of  the  early  Christian  monks  were  filled  with  such 
accounts.  I  might  illustrate  this  point  by  other 
like  coincidences  in  the  lives  of  these  three  men 
who  became  the  founders  of  three  religions.     One 


PERSIAN  ZOROASTRIAN  TRINITARIANISM     71 

example  more  must  suffice.  All  these  traditions 
contain  a  miraculous  birth  through  a  divine  par- 
entage or  power,  but  the  Zoroastrian  account  goes 
a  step  further.  It  makes  the  birth  of  the  mother 
of  Zoroaster  immaculate  and  miraculous,  and, 
though  this  development  of  tradition  does  not  ap- 
pear in  the  New  Testament,  it  does  appear  in  the 
post-apostolic  apocryphal  legends  that  quickly 
grew  up  around  Jesus  and  his  mother,  and  the  im- 
maculate conception  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  as  weU 
as  of  her  son,  not  only  became  an  article  of 
Christian  faith,  but  remains  a  dogma  of  the  Catho- 
lic church  to  this  day.  The  doctrine  and  cultus  of 
the  Virgin  Mary,  be  it  noted,  is  not  peculiar  to 
Christianity.  The  virginity  of  the  mothers  of  the 
founders  of  a  new  religion  is  repeated  again  and 
again  in  legendary  history.  Zoroastrianism  has  its 
virgin  mother  ;  so  Buddhism  ;  and  the  list  might 
be  lengthened.  Illustrious  men  have  been  thus 
partially  deified  by  ascribing  to  them  a  divine 
fatherhood.  Plato,  in  the  golden  age  of  Athenian 
culture,  did  not  escape  the  fate  of  genius.  Legend 
made  Apollo  his  father.  Even  mythology  has  its 
virgins.  Athene,  the  patron  goddess  of  Athens, 
was  endowed  with  the  special  gift  of  virginity,  and 
hence  the  name  of  her  great  temple,  the  Parthenon. 
It  is  natural  to  invest  any  great  religious  reformer, 
especially  in  an  uncritical  age,  with  peculiar  rela- 
tions to  the  heavenly  world.  First  he  becomes  a 
special  messenger  or  prophet  of  God.  The  next 
step  is  easy,  viz.,  to  impute  to  his  message  a  divine 


72  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

inspiration.  How  natural,  then,  to  believe  that  his 
birth  was  not  ia  the  ordinary  way!  Human 
motherhood  explains  the  reality  of  his  humanity. 
Divine  fatherhood  explains  what  is  supernatural 
and  miraculous  in  his  life  and  charaxjter.  Incarna- 
tion is  an  obvious  coroUary.  A  demi-god  or  god- 
man  is  the  logical  result.  These  stages  of  legendary 
evolution,  so  easily  developed  in  the  times  of  a 
credulous  and  superstitious  faith,  have  been  re- 
peated again  and  agaiu  in  the  history  of  religion. 

No  trinity  had  yet  appeared  in  Zoroastrianism, 
but  one  feature  of  the  developed  Zoroastrian  doc- 
trine was  preparing  the  way  for  a  trinitarian  tend- 
ency, namely,  the  raising  of  Zoroaster  from  the 
rank  of  a  human  reformer  to  that  of  a  divine 
messiah  and  mediatorial  demi-god.  The  religion 
of  Zoroaster  himself,  if  we  may  judge  from  the 
Gathas,  which  purport  to  record  many  of  his  say- 
ings, was  one  of  remarkable  spirituality  and 
purity.  Righteousness,  sin,  moral  agency,  free 
will,  moral  law  and  its  sanction,  involving  pun- 
ishment and  reward,  the  spiritual  and  immortal 
character  of  the  soul,  and  final  judgment,  with 
its  everlasting  issues,  —  such  radical  truths  of 
the  moral  consciousness  seem  to  have  been  cardi- 
nal in  Zoroaster's  own  religious  faith.  Naturally 
his  reform  was  laid  on  the  lines  of  a  redemptive 
movement  of  God  for  the  healing  and  saving  of 
mankind  from  the  miserable  condition  into  which 
they  had  fallen  through  the  evils  inherent  in  their 
natural  condition.    The  key-note  of  his  gospel  was 


PERSIAN  ZOROASTRIAN  TRINITARIANISM    73 

redemption.  It  was  a  divine  offer  of  help  and 
salvation  through  a  human  instrument.  So  close 
is  the  analogy  between  the  Zoroastrian  prophetism 
and  messianism  and  that  of  the  later  Jews,  that 
one  cannot  help  surmising  some  historical  connec- 
tion between  the  two ;  and  when  we  remember  that 
the  Jewish  messianism  in  its  fully  developed  form, 
as  it  appeared  in  the  two  centuries  before  Christ, 
was  post-exilic,  the  inference  becomes  not  at  all 
improbable  that  the  Jews  of  the  Captivity  gathered 
many  of  their  later  messianic  ideas  from  Zoroas- 
trianism.  This  is  quite  surely  the  case  with  the 
Jewish  eschatology.  The  book  of  Daniel  is  post- 
exilic.  The  doctrines  of  the  immortality  of  the 
soul,  of  the  resurrection,  of  evil  spirits,  especially 
of  Satan  the  arch  fiend,  of  heaven  and  hell,  which 
appear  in  later  Judaism,  are  quite  clearly  of 
Zoroastrian  origin. 

It  is  in  the  second  stage  of  Zoroastrian  evolu- 
tion that  the  element  of  mediation  and  redemption 
through  a  divinely  commissioned  savior  becomes 
more  marked.  As  in  the  evolution  of  the  Chris- 
tian trinitarian  dogma,  a  human  messiahship  gave 
way  to  a  semi-divine  mediatorship,  so  with  the 
Zoroastrian  movement.  But  here  occurred  a  pe- 
culiar chapter  in  this  evolution.  A  new  actor  ap- 
pears on  the  scene  in  the  person  of  Sosiosh,  "  the 
benefactor  "  or  savior.  Let  it  be  noted  in  pass- 
ing that  this  term  "  savior,"  in  a  religious  sense, 
is  not  original  in  the  New  Testament.  The  Zend 
word  Sosiosh  clearly  corresponds  in  meaning  to 
the  Greek  word  o-o)T^p  (savior). 


74  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

Plutarch,  writing  about  the  time  of  the  reduc- 
tion of  the  oral  traditions  of  Christ's  life  and 
gospel  to  written  form,  styles  the  gods  o-wrijpcs,  or 
saviors  and  friends  of  men.  So,  in  the  New  Pla- 
tonic school,  ^sculapius,  the  god  of  medicine  and 
healing,  became  the  centre  of  a  special  religious 
cult,  and  came  to  be  conmionly  designated  among 
his  worshipers  as  'O  o-corrjp,  that  is,  "  The  Savior." 
In  the  Zoroastrian  tradition  this  person,  who  ap- 
pears under  the  title  of  Sosiosh,  is  purely  mythical. 
He  is  represented  to  be  a  son  of  Zoroaster,  but 
he  is  to  be  supernaturally  born  from  a  wife  of 
Zoroaster  at  the  very  end  of  the  world,  when  the 
measure  of  its  miseries  is  full.  Then  his  saving 
work  as  a  messenger  of  Ormuzd  will  be  completed, 
in  raising  the  dead,  rewarding  the  righteous  with 
everlasting  happiness,  and  annihilating  the  whole 
kingdom  of  the  wicked.  This  account  of  Sosiosh, 
so  plainly  mythical,  yet  so  closely  connected  with 
Zoroaster's  life,  is  one  of  Darmesteter's  strongest 
points  against  the  historicity  of  Zoroaster  himseK, 
and  I  confess  that  it  well-nigh  breaks  down  the 
historical  probability  of  the  whole  Zoroastrian 
tradition,  though  I  do  not  even  yet  give  up  the 
view  of  West  and  Mills.  But  in  either  case  it  is 
clear  that  in  the  later  parts  of  the  Avesta  we  have 
passed  completely  out  of  authentic  history  into 
the  region  of  legend.  The  part  played  by  the 
law  of  evolution  is  well  illustrated  by  the  Sosiosh 
myth.  In  the  earlier  Avesta  Sosiosh  is  mentioned, 
but  only  in  a  general  way.     The  later  writings 


PERSIAN   ZOROASTRIAN  TRINITARIANISM    75 

grow  more  and  more  explicit  and  particular.  His 
supernatural  character  and  mission  from  Ormuzd 
is  fully  set  forth.  It  is  declared  of  him  that  he 
"  will  come  from  the  region  of  the  dawn  to  free 
the  world  from  death  and  decay,"  "  when  the 
dead  shall  arise  and  immortality  commence." 
Darmesteter  believes  this  to  be  a  nature  or  solar 
myth,  and  suggests  that  Zoroaster  was  originally 
a  storm  god.  Already  in  the  Zend-Avesta  Sosiosh 
is  a  son  of  Zoroaster,  to  be  supernaturally  born  at 
the  end  of  Time,  but,  when  we  pass  from  the 
Avesta  to  the  Pahlavi  Bundahish,  Sosiosh  becomes 
the  last  of  three  prophets,  or  divine  messengers  of 
Ormuzd,  each  of  whom  is  to  reign  a  thousand 
years,  —  the  name  Sosiosh  being  given  especially 
to  the  last.  These  Zoroastrian  millenniums  have 
an  interesting  historical  connection  with  the  mil- 
lennium of  Jewish  expectation  and  hope  which 
passed  over  into  Christianity.  The  third  and  last 
millennium,  which  Sosiosh  will  inaugurate  and 
conclude  with  the  resurrection,  judgment,  and 
destruction  of  death  and  heU,  became  the  great 
rallying  point  of  Zoroastrian  faith. 

We  have  already  referred  to  the  connection  be- 
tween the  Jewish  messianism  and  millennium  and 
the  Zoroastrian  ideas.  Quite  as  remarkable  are 
the  coincidences  between  the  Zoroastrian  doc- 
trine of  "last  things"  and  the  Christian.  The 
Christian  eschatology,  beginning  with  the  second 
coming  of  Christ,  followed  by  the  resurrection  of 
the  dead  and  the  general  judgment,  and  conclud- 


76  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

ing  with  the  eternal  rewards  of  heaven  and  the 
eternal  punishments  of  heU,  is  so  completely  a 
repetition  of  the  Zoroastrian  "  last  things,"  that  a 
borrowing  from  one  side  or  the  other  seems  almost 
a  fact  to  be  accepted  at  once,  were  no  historical 
relation  directly  traceable.  Certain  similar  escha- 
tological  elements  indeed  are  to  be  found  in  other 
Ethnic  religions,  as  for  example  the  dogmas  of 
personal  immortality,  of  heaven  and  heU,  which  are 
clearly  set  forth  in  the  Greek  mythology  and  later 
Greek  philosophy,  and  are  made  familiar  to  us  in 
Plato  and  Plutarch.  But  the  doctrine  of  a  bodily 
resurrection  through  the  instrumentality  of  a  di- 
vinely sent  mediator  is  surely  unique  in  aU  Ethnic 
religions,  and  the  direct  historical  connection  that 
can  be  clearly  traced  through  Judaism  between  the 
Christian  and  the  Zoroastrian  dogmas  seems  to  re- 
move all  ground  for  doubt.  It  is  my  own  growing 
conviction  that  much  of  the  eschatological  language 
of  the  New  Testament  can  best  be  explained  by  ref- 
erence to  the  Zoroastrian  Persian  messianism  and 
eschatology.  The  Jewish  post-exilic  and  pre-Chris- 
tian writings  are  full  of  eschatological  ideas  and 
language  plainly  suggestive  of  Persian  sources,  and 
these  same  ideas  and  expressions  reappear  in  the 
sayings  of  Christ  and  the  letters  of  Paul.  What 
a  Zoroastrian  ring  there  is  in  Paul's  words  in 
the  fifteenth  chapter  of  1  Corinthians,  "  The  last 
enemy  that  shall  be  destroyed  is  death."  The  book 
of  Revelation  simply  gathers  up  all  the  Zoroas- 
trian, Jewish,  and  Christian  figurative  language  in 


PERSIAN  ZOROASTRIAN  TRINITARIANISM    77 

its  vivid  portrayal  of  the  eschatological  faith  of  the 
age  in  which  it  was  written.  The  prominence  of 
fire  all  through  the  New  Testament  as  the  element 
of  destruction  and  punishment  is  a  pecuharly  Zoro- 
astrian  reminiscence.  The  description  in  the  Sec- 
ond Epistle  of  Peter  of  the  final  conflagration,  in 
which  "  the  earth  and  the  works  that  are  therein 
shall  be  burned  up,"  is  an  exact  transcript  of  the 
Zoroastrian  theory  of  the  mode  of  the  ending  of 
this  present  world.  The  apocalyptic  lake  of  fire  into 
which  death  and  Hades  are  cast  is  also  Zoroastrian, 
except  that,  while  the  fire  of  the  Zoroastrian  the- 
ory involves  annihilation,  the  apocalyptic  fire  burns, 
without  annihilating,  forever.  I  will  only  add  that 
the  Devil  or  Satan  of  the  Bible  is  the  Ahriman  of 
the  Avesta,  and  was,  we  cannot  doubt,  a  direct  im- 
portation from  Persia,  though  the  allusions  to  the 
Devil  and  his  kingdom  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  and 
Johannine  Epistles  are  apparently  Gnostic  in  char- 
acter. But  Gnosticism  is  distinctly  Zoroastrian  in 
origin  and  is  directly  based  on  the  Persian  dualism. 
We  now  come  to  the  third  stage  in  the  trinita- 
rian  development  of  the  Zoroastrian  doctrine.  It 
is  to  be  noted  that  no  full  triaity  has  yet  emerged. 
The  doctrine  of  Sosiosh  as  a  semi-divine  mediator 
and  savior  has  indeed  prepared  the  way  for  such 
a  result,  but  the  movement  here  paused  and  in  fact 
was  never  so  fully  completed  as  in  other  Ethnic 
trinities.  We  may  well  here  ask  the  reasons  why ; 
and  they  are  close  at  hand.  To  begin  with,  ori- 
ginal Zoroastrianism  was  a  monotheistic  reaction 


78  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

from  the  polytheism  out  of  which  it  sprang,  like 
the  Hebraism  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  history 
of  Judaism  shows  how  little  ground  there  is  in  such 
a  monotheism  for  a  trinitarian  development.  The 
natural  soil  of  a  trinity  of  gods  is  polytheism  rather 
than  monotheism,  as  we  have  seen  in  the  history 
of  the  Ethnic  trinities,  all  of  which  sprang  from 
polytheistic  sources.  It  was  once  a  favorite  idea 
of  conservative  scholars  such  as  Hardwick  and 
Rawlinson  that  the  Persian  dualism  was  the  off- 
spring of  an  original  monotheism ;  but  recent  in- 
vestigations in  philology  and  comparative  rehgion 
have  shown  it  to  be  utterly  without  foundation,  as 
also  the  kindred  idea  concerning  the  earliest  doc- 
trine of  the  Hebrew  people.  The  monotheism  of 
the  Old  Testament  beginning  with  the  first  chapter 
of  Genesis  is  a  reformed  version  of  an  older  poly- 
theistic myth  which  the  Chaldaeo-Babylonian  slabs 
of  the  resurrected  library  in  Nineveh  have  laid 
open  before  our  eyes,  and  which  cuneiform  scholars 
are  already  learning  to  read. 

It  is  not,  then,  surprising  that  Zoroastrianism, 
with  its  strong  leaning  to  a  monotheistic-dualistic 
rather  than  polytheistic  view  of  deity,  shoidd  stop 
short  of  a  full  trinity,  which  is  a  direct  step  back- 
wards towards  the  ground  once  left  behind.  Such 
a  step  could  be  taken  only  when  a  religious  cor- 
ruption and  decline  had  set  in. 

There  is  another  reason  for  the  incompleteness 
of  the  Zoroastrian  trinitarianism  even  in  its  fullest 
development.     Persia  at  its  highest  point  of  civil- 


PERSIAN  ZOROASTRIAN  TRINITARIANISM    79 

ization  never  rose  to  the  same  rank  with  India  or 
Greece.  Its  culture  included  poetry,  art,  chron- 
icle, and  ethics,  but  never  reached  the  still  higher 
sphere  of  abstract  speculative  thought.  No  school 
of  pure  philosophy  ever  flourished  there.  Thus 
the  Persian  religion  was  never  subjected  to  a  meta- 
physical and  scholastic  treatment.  Its  religious 
system  was  theosophic  rather  than  philosophic, 
—  a  work  of  the  imagination  rather  than  of  the 
pure  speculative  reason.  It  would  be  idle  to  ex- 
pect, under  such  circumstances,  the  evolution  of 
a  complete  theological  trinity,  and  we  shall  not 
find  it;  but,  as  we  have  seen,  a  step  was  taken 
which  went  a  long  way  toward  such  a  conclusion, 
and  a  trinitarian  shadow  was  cast  which  will 
finally  give  us  a  mythological  triad,  if  not  a  phi- 
losophical trinity.  This  step  was  its  Sosiosh  me- 
diation doctrine.  The  idea  of  a  mediator  between 
God  and  man  is  a  fundamental  element  in  every 
trinitarian  dogma,  and  it  became  central  and  reg- 
nant in  Zoroastrian  belief.  This  doctrine  of  a 
divine  mediator  does  not  demand  a  trinity  as  a 
philosophical  necessity,  but  it  naturally  leads  to  it 
unless  counter  ideas  are  in  the  way.  Just  such 
a  counter  idea  was  in  the  way  to  the  Zoroastrian 
believer,  namely,  his  deep  prejudice  against  the 
old  animistic  polytheism.  Only  when  this  preju- 
dice was  suffered  to  decline  and  die  out  could  the 
trinitarian  evolution  have  free  way.  This  was 
precisely  the  historical  course  which  the  Persian 
religion  took.     The  Avesta  itself  clearly  discloses 


80  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

a  revolutionary  polytheistic  tendency.  The  over- 
throw of  the  Persian  empire  by  Alexander  intro- 
duced Greek  influences  and  ideas.  The  rise  of  the 
Parthian  kingdom  with  its  semi-barbarism  still 
further  disorganized  and  demoralized  the  old  Per- 
sian religious  faith.  The  ancient  Zend  language 
in  which  the  Avesta  was  written  grew  corrupt, 
and  out  of  it  emerged  the  new  Persian  dialect 
called  Pahlavi.  Thus  the  Zoroastrian  sacred 
scriptures  ceased  to  be  read  by  the  people,  and  the 
Zoroastrian  monotheism  gave  way  rapidly  to  the 
polytheism  which  reigned  around  it.  Its  very  his- 
tory became  more  and  more  obscure.  Not  till  the 
new  Persian  empire  of  the  Sassanidae  in  the  third 
century  A.  D.  was  a  new  chapter  added,  and  a  new 
movement  given  to  the  mediating  principle  which 
had  characterized  it  from  the  beginning.  But  the 
significance  of  this  new  chapter  lies  in  the  fact 
that  it  leaves  the  original  Zoroastrian  starting- 
point  and  line  of  evolution  and  reverts  back  to  the 
Madzean  polytheism  out  of  which  Zoroaster  him- 
self arose. 

The  two  earliest  stages  of  Zoroastrian  trinitarian 
evolution,  as  we  have  seen,  were  the  outgrowth  of 
the  mission  of  Zoroaster,  —  a  historical  character. 
Though  they  quickly  passed  from  history  to  legend, 
and  then  to  myth,  they  at  least  started  from  his- 
torical ground.  Not  so  with  the  third  stage.  It 
was  mythological  from  the  beginning,  and  gathered 
around  one  of  the  most  ancient  of  the  Aryan  di- 
vinities, Mithra.     Mithra,  or  Mitra,  first  appeal's 


PERSIAN  ZOROASTRIAN  TRINITARIANISM    81 

as  a  sun  god  in  the  Indian  Vedas  in  close  associa- 
tion with  Varuna,  the  great  heavenly  sky-god,  and 
already  his  mediatorial  function  is  visible.  He  is 
"  the  giver,"  "  the  generous  one,"  "  the  friend,"  of 
man.  It  is  in  a  similar  form  and  function  that 
Mithra  appears  in  the  Avestan  writings.  He  is  a 
creature  of  Ormuzd,  "  the  created  light,"  that  is, 
a  sun-god.  As  such  he  is  "  a  servant  and  organ  " 
of  Ormuzd,  mediating  between  him  and  man.  But 
through  the  Avestan  period  Mithra  remains  in  the 
background.  First  Zoroaster  himseK,  and  next 
Sosiosh,  his  semi-divine  son,  are  the  chief  instru- 
ments through  which  Ormuzd  carries  on  his  be- 
nevolent designs  for  the  amelioration  and  final 
salvation  of  man.  Not  till  the  decline  of  the  ori- 
ginal Zoroastrianism  has  fairly  set  in  does  Mithra 
appear  as  the  great  mediating  divinity,  at  last 
supplanting,  not  only  Zoroaster  and  Sosiosh,  but 
even  Ormuzd  himself.  The  history  of  this  curious 
evolution,  involving  entirely  new  cyclic  movements 
on  new  lines,  is  obscure.  Enough  here  to  say  that 
it  gathered  force  as  the  original  Zoroastrianism 
declined,  without  any  apparent  opposition.  Even 
in  the  latest  Yahsts  of  the  Avesta  Mithra  is  plainly 
rising  into  greater  prominence.  He  is  thus  de- 
scribed, in  the  prayer  called  Mihir  Yahst,  as 
"  holy,  the  most  beautiful  of  creatures,"  all-seeing 
and  all-powerful.  Especially  is  he  "  the  protector 
and  patron  of  truth-loving  men  "  and  "the  dis- 
penser of  blessings."  He  is  also  the  "most  victo- 
rious "  servant  of  Ormuzd  against  the  Kingdo; 


82  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

Evil.  Ahriman  trembles  before  him.  He  "  pro- 
tects the  poor  and  oppressed,"  and  "  defends  the 
faithful  against  evil  spirits,  against  death,  and 
leads  them  toward  immortality."  It  is  remark- 
able that  in  this  very  period,  when  a  new  medi- 
ating god  is  coming  to  the  front,  the  first  sign  of 
a  divine  triad  should  display  itself.  One  of  the 
Persian  kings,  Artaxerxes  Mnemon,  rededicating  a 
Zoroastrian  temple  which  Darius  his  ancestor  had 
built,  solemnly  declared :  "  By  the  grace  of  Or- 
muzd  I  have  here  established  Anhita  and  Mithra. 
May  Ormuzd,  Anhita,  and  Mithra  protect  me." 
This  new  trinity  plays  no  great  part  in  the  later 
Zoroastrianism.  Mithra  becomes  the  central  figure 
of  it,  absorbing  more  and  more  the  functions  of 
Sosiosh  "  the  savior,"  as  is  seen  in  the  application 
to  him  of  the  term  "  mediator."  Such  is  the  tes- 
timony of  Plutarch,  who  wrote  in  the  first  century 
of  the  Christian  era.  Describing  the  Zoroastrian 
dualism,  Plutarch  says  (Isis  and  Osiris,  46)  : 
"  Mithra  is  between  the  two  (Ormuzd  and  Ahri- 
man),  for  which  reason  the  Persians  call  Mithra 
'  the  Mediator  '  (/xetrtnys)."  Thus  Zoroastrianism 
proper  gave  way  to  the  new  Mithraism.  Mithra 
as  "  Mediator  "  became  the  centre  of  a  new  cult 
which  in  the  second  and  third  centuries  A.  D.  was 
very  popular  and  widespread  in  the  Eoman  world, 
patronized  by  emperors,  and  with  special  temples 
in  Rome  itself.  It  was  the  mediatorial  character 
of  Mithra  that  gave  his  worship  its  popularity  — 
a  popularity  so  great  that  at  one  time  it  threat- 


PERSIAN  ZOROASTRIAN  TRINITARIANISM    83 

ened  to  rival  and  even  eclipse  Christianity  itself, 
which  was  also  making  rapid  strides  with  its  own 
Christian  mediation  doctrine.  Mithra,  in  the  eyes 
of  his  worshipers,  was  the  "living  and  abiding 
link  between  the  visible  and  the  invisible."  He 
was  "  the  secondary  principle  of  good,"  "  the  con- 
ductor of  departed  souls  "  to  the  narrow  bridge 
which  must  be  crossed  to  reach  the  heavenly 
world.  As  the  dualistic  doctrine  of  evil  in  all  its 
forms  had  a  primary  place  in  Mithraism,  and  was 
in  harmony  with  the  pessimism  and  religious  reac- 
tion of  the  age,  it  is  not  wonderful  that  the  Mithra 
cult  should  have  assumed  a  strongly  sacrificial 
and  bloody  character.  Mithra  himseK  became  the 
great  high  priest  in  these  sacrifices.  He  was  re- 
presented as  slaying  a  bull,  in  virtue  of  his  atoning 
function.  The  tauriholium  was  the  most  solemn 
sacrificial  rite  of  Mithraic  worship,  symbolizing 
and  efficiently  procuring  for  the  suppliant  for 
whom  it  was  performed  remission  of  sins  and  re- 
generation to  a  new  spiritual  and  heavenly  life. 
It  was  indeed  a  baptism  by  blood.  The  subject 
of  it  was  placed  naked  imder  the  altar  of  sacrifice, 
so  that  the  blood  of  the  victim  might  be  shed 
directly  upon  him.  A  strange  transaction  indeed, 
and  strangely  like  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  ;  "  Without  the  shedding  of  blood 
there  is  no  remission  !  "  Strange,  I  say,  when  we 
consider  the  character  of  the  period  in  which  it 
occurred.  It  is  a  suggestive  proof  of  the  terrible 
power  of  sin  and  of  its  remorseful  workings  upon 
a  soul. 


84  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

I  have  already  referred  to  the  fact  that  Mithra, 
who  was  originally  subordinate  to  Ormuzd,  and 
even  reduced  to  the  third  place  in  the  triad,  sub- 
sequently rose  practically  to  the  first  place,  sup- 
planting Ormuzd  himself.  Such  a  process,  by 
which  the  mediating  member  of  the  trinity,  as  the 
special  friend  and  savior  of  men,  should  become 
first  and  nearest  in  the  thoughts,  and  affections, 
and  hopes  of  men,  and  hence  in  time  first  in  the 
divine  order  of  the  gods,  is  most  natural,  and  we 
have  already  found  it  a  marked  feature  of  the  his- 
torical evolution  of  most  of  the  Ethnic  trinities. 
Thus  in  the  Babylonian  triad  Marduk,  the  me- 
diating sun-god,  usurps  the  place  of  Ea,  his 
father.  The  same  was  true  of  Vishnu-Krishna  in 
the  Hindoo  trinity,  who,  in  his  capacity  of  god- 
man  and  mediator,  reduced  Brahma  to  almost  a 
shadow.  So  Mithraism  pushed  Ormuzd  back  into 
a  place  of  inferiority,  or  rather  he  was  quietly  dis- 
placed and  forgotten.  The  triad  was  practically 
reduced  to  unity  in  the  Mithraic  faith.  I  must 
refer  to  my  earlier  work,  "  A  Critical  History," 
etc.,  for  a  complete  account  of  the  remarkable 
evolution  of  the  Christian  trinity  in  the  same  di- 
rection, by  which  the  original  subordination  doc- 
trine of  the  early  Greek  church  was  transformed 
into  a  theory  of  triunity  in  which  the  three  were 
made  absolutely  equal,  or  rather  were  reduced  to 
personal  unity  manifesting  itself  in  a  plural  form, 
—  a  view  which  at  last  reached  a  result  curiously 
similar  to  the  Mithraic,  namely,  that  the  Father, 


PERSIAN  ZOROASTRIAN  TRINITARIANISM    85 

the  first  and  most  exalted  person  of  the  Patristic 
Trinity,  has  become  practically  swallowed  up  and 
lost  in  the  absoluteness  of  the  deity  of  the  Second 
Person,  the  incarnate  Son,  known  on  earth  as 
Jesus  of  Nazareth.  To  make  the  analogy  more 
complete  it  only  needed  that  Zoroaster  himself, 
the  founder  of  the  reformed  Madzean  religion, 
should  have  remained  the  central  figure  in  its  evo- 
lution as  he  was  at  first. 

One  radical  difference  between  the  Mithraic 
and  the  Christian  conception  of  mediatorship  is 
clearly  discernible.  Mithra  was  a  mediator  be- 
tween Ormuzd  and  Ahriman,  while  the  Christian 
scheme  made  Christ  a  mediator  between  God  and 
mankind.  It  is  true  that  Origen  taught  that 
Christ  paid  a  ransom  to  Satan  and  so  released 
mankind  from  his  power,  and  this  thoroughly 
materialistic  view  became  the  traditional  church 
doctrine  for  nearly  a  thousand  years.  Augustine 
accepted  it  without  any  questioning,  and  his  au- 
thority carried  it  on  into  the  Middle  Ages.  Anselm 
and  Abelard  seem  to  have  been  the  first  to  ques- 
tion it.  But  the  doctrine  of  Paul  and  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  though  essentially  differ- 
ing in  other  respects,  agreed  in  this,  that  the  me- 
diation wrought  by  Christ  was  between  God  and 
sinful  men,  and  both  views  were  founded  in  the 
Old  Testament  sacrificial  system,  which  knew  no- 
thing of  Satan  as  a  party  to  the  transaction,  and 
made  much  of  God's  holy  law  and  of  man's  viola- 
tion of  it,  beginning  with  Adam  the  head  of  the 


86  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

race.  Anselm,  the  true  founder  of  the  substitu- 
tional theory  of  atonement,  was  in  harmony  on 
this  point  with  the  Old  Testament  and  PauL 
Whence  Origen  derived  his  theory  of  mediator- 
ship  between  God  and  the  Devil  is  not  clear.  But 
he  was  weU  acquainted  with  the  Gnostic  dualistic 
ideas  of  his  day  and  found  them  even  in  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  and  thus  might  easily  have  been  influenced 
toward  a  view  which  quite  harmonized  with  the 
tendencies  around  him.  It  was  in  this  very  period 
in  the  history  of  Christianity  that  the  doctrine  of 
Satan  and  his  Kingdom  of  Evil  became  especially 
prominent  in  the  faith  of  the  church,  not  only  in 
its  creed  but  also  in  its  life.  Monasticism,  which 
started  from  a  strongly  dualistic  conception  of 
the  world,  in  its  earlier  history  is  full  of  illus- 
trations of  this  view  of  Satan  as  sharing  this  world 
with  God,  and  in  the  legendary  lives  of  the  more 
famous  monks  the  Devil  and  his  demons  and  the 
powers  of  good  contend  on  almost  equal  terms.  I 
have  already  stated  my  opinion  as  to  the  histor- 
ical background  of  this  whole  phase  of  Christian 
thought,  including  the  eschatology  of  which  it 
forms  a  part.  It  is  Zoroastrian  and  Persian,  and 
I  am  prepared  to  believe  that  Origen's  theory  of  a 
ransom  paid  by  Christ  to  Satan  was  somehow 
drawn,  though  perhaps  indirectly,  from  this  source. 
It  was  characteristic  of  the  Zoroastrian  dualism 
that  it  viewed  Ormuzd  as  the  representative  of 
goodness,  and  light,  and  joy.  All  badness  and 
darkness,  physical,  intellectual,  or  moral,  all  the 


PERSIAN  ZOROASTRIAN  TRINITARIANISM    87 

miseries  and  sorrow  of  this  world,  including  sick- 
ness and  death,  were  the  work  of  Ahriman. 
Ormuzd  was  always  the  beneficent  friend  of  man, 
and  revealed  his  beneficence  through  mediating 
instruments  such  as  Zoroaster,  Sosiosh,  and  Mithra. 
The  conception  of  a  mediator  who  should  propi- 
tiate such  a  being  by  offerings  of  appeasement  was 
wholly  foreign  to  Zoroastrian  thought.  The  Mith- 
raic  cult  illustrates  the  growing  sense  of  the  moral 
evil  and  misery  in  the  world,  and  of  the  power  for 
evil  of  Ahriman  and  his  allies.  The  tauroholium^ 
though  so  materialistic  in  form,  was  a  means  to- 
ward a  moral  regeneration  and  new  spiritual  life 
in  this  world  and  the  next.  The  myth  which  lay 
behind  it  of  Mithra's  slaying  a  buU  with  his  own 
hand  was  based  on  the  conception  of  Mithra  as  the 
great  mediating  power  between  good  and  evil,  be- 
tween man  and  his  arch  enemy  Ahriman.  He  was, 
in  the  eyes  of  his  worshipers,  the  sole  regenerator 
and  savior  from  sin  and  death,  and  all  moral  evil. 
One  cannot  study  deeply  the  Zoroastrian  Mithraic 
faith  without  a  growing  sense  of  its  lofty,  pure, 
and  spiritual  character.  It  is  no  wonder,  in  an 
age  when  the  moral  nature  and  instincts  of  men 
were  being  aroused  to  a  new  eagerness  for  religious 
light  and  truth  to  heal  the  moral  maladies  of  the 
declining  empire,  that  this  Oriental  reformed  cult, 
behind  which  was  the  dim  but  attractive  figure  of 
one  of  the  world's  saints,  should  have  arrested  and 
drawn  the  hearts  of  many  seekers  after  truth,  and 
even  rivaled  that  other  religion,  coming  from  the 


88  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

same  Oriental  quarter,  whose  teachings  and  offers 
of  spiritual  good  were  in  such  general  harmony, — 
both  working  for  the  regeneration  and  salvation  of 
men. 

I  have  alluded  to  Origen's  conception  of  the 
work  of  Christ  in  the  atonement,  so  strangely  sug- 
gestive of  the  Mithraic  doctrine.  It  is  interestiug 
to  note  that  in  another  direction  he  was  led  toward 
a  similar  Mithraic  conclusion.  M.  Jean  ReviUe,  in 
his  "  La  Religion  sous  les  Severes,"  has  weU  said 
that  "  the  cult  of  Mithra  offers  very  great  analo- 
gies to  the  cult  of  the  Gnostics."  The  Gnostics 
were  in  fact  essentially  dualistic  Zoroastrians  in 
Christian  disguise,  and  we  must  not  forget  how 
widespread  were  the  Gnostic  heresies  in  the 
Christian  church  in  this  period.  Irenseus  recounts 
about  a  hundred  different  Gnostic  sects.  Origen 
and  his  Alexandrian  school  formed  a  sort  of  medi- 
ating position  between  the  church  and  the  Gnostic 
parties.  Origen  himseK  was  inclined  to  a  free  and 
tolerant  speculation.  One  of  his  speculations,  which 
afterward  was  used  to  his  discredit,  was  his  theory 
of  the  final  restoration  of  aU  souls.  Even  Satan  in 
his  view  might  be  restored  to  holiness.  This  idea 
was  based  on  his  doctrine  of  God  as  good  and  de- 
siring the  salvation  of  all  moral  beings,  and  of  free 
will  by  which  all  such  beings  could  be  recovered 
from  sin  if  so  disposed.  Now  both  these  ideas 
are  in  complete  accord  with  Zoroastrian  theo- 
logy. This  is  not  the  place  to  discuss  the  matter 
further.     I  wiU  only  add  that  Origen's  influence 


PERSIAN  ZOROASTRIAN  TRINITARIANISM    89 

was  great  and  pervasive  in  the  early  development 
of  Christian  theology,  and  it  is  my  own  belief 
that  the  Zoroastrian  religion  explains  not  only  the 
widespread  Gnostic  heresies,  but  also  the  dualistic 
element  which  entered  so  deeply  into  Christian 
soteriology  and  eschatology,  and  which  has  contin- 
ued to  leaven  Christian  theological  thought  even 
to  the  present  day.^ 

The  subsequent  triumph  of  Christianity  and  ex- 
tinction of  Zoroastrianism  in  its  later  Mithraic 
form  used  to  be  regarded  by  Christian  historians 
as  evidence  of  the  superiority  of  the  former,  and 
of  its  miraculous  and  divine  origin.  In  fact,  the 
decisive  blow  was  struck  by  Christian  emperors. 
Their  whole  policy  —  from  the  time  of  the  politic 
and  tolerant  Constantine,  with  the  exception  of 
Julian  the  New  Platonist  and  perhaps  that  also  of 
Valentinian,  who,  according  to  Ammianus  Marcel- 
linus,  though  a  Christian,  stood  evenly  balanced 
between  the  two  religious  parties  —  was  directed 
to  the  suppression  of  all  the  Ethnic  religions  and 
rites.  In  377  the  prefect  of  Rome  ordered  the 
temples  of  Mithra  to  be  closed ;  and  when  Theodo^ 
sius  in  394  entered  Rome  a  conqueror  he  issued 

1  Outside  of  distinctively  Christian  ideas  the  dualistic  explana- 
tion of  the  world  and  its  moral  mysteries  has  of  late  had  a  strong 
attraction  for  philosophical  thinkers.  James  Mill,  according  to 
the  statement  of  his  son,  J.  S.  Mill,  agnostic  as  he  was  on  the 
whole  subject,  regarded  dualism  as  the  most  satisfactory  and  prob- 
able of  all  the  theories  in  vogue.  I  may  add  that  the  French  histo- 
rian Michelet,  in  a  little  book,  Bible  de  VHumanite,  concludes 
a  review  of  the  leading  creeds  of  the  world  by  expressing  his  own 
decided  preference  for  the  dualistic  Zoroastrian. 


go  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

an  edict  commanding  the  entire  suppression  of  aU 
pagan  worship.  Every  temple  was  shut,  and  many- 
fanes  made  sacred  by  ancient  tradition  were  ruth- 
lessly violated.  Perhaps  the  most  violent  act  was 
the  sacking  of  the  House  and  Temple  of  Vesta  in 
the  Forum,  whose  cult  had  come  down  from  the 
very  origin  of  Rome  itself,  and  was  held  in  the 
highest  veneration.  The  worship  of  the  goddess 
was  broken  up.  The  vestal  virgins  were  driven 
out.  Their  House,  that  had  been  sacred  from  all 
intrusion  for  a  thousand  years,  was  ransacked, 
its  treasures  scattered,  and  the  doors  barred. 
Whether  Christianity  itself  in  this  period  of  its 
prosperity  and  growing  power  could  have  endured 
such  treatment  and  outlived  it  cannot  be  told, 
since,  fortunately,  no  imperial  pagan  reaction 
came.  But  Gibbon's  remark  seems  historically 
just,  that  no  religion  can  long  survive  when  its 
outward  worship  is  completely  suppressed ;  and  the 
conjecture  of  Kenan  in  this  connection  is  not  with- 
out warrant :  "  One  might  say  that  if  Christianity 
had  been  arrested  in  its  career  by  some  mortal 
malady,  the  world  might  have  been  Mithraistic." 
Force  and  violence  have  played  a  great  part  in  the 
religious  conquests  of  the  world.  The  acts  of 
Theodosius  were  repeated  by  Charlemagne  in  the 
conversion  of  the  Saxons,  our  own  ancestors,  only 
with  increased  wantonness  and  barbarity.  And  as 
one  gazes  to-day  on  the  ruins  of  the  Temple  and 
House  of  Vesta  which  the  spade  of  the  archaeologist 
has  opened  to  our  view,  with  its  statues  of  vestals 


PERSIAN  ZOROASTRIAN  TRINITARIANISM    91 

once  famous  in  history,  one  is  reminded  irresistibly 
of  similar  ruins  of  beautiful  English  abbeys,  with 
like  statues  of  famous  abbots  and  monks,  that  were 
suppressed  and  dismantled  by  the  strong,  tyran- 
nical hand  of  Henry  VIII.,  their  inmates  driven 
out  and  suffered  to  wander  and  die  in  penury,  and 
their  very  names  given  over  to  calumny  and  re- 
proach, until  at  last  a  new  revision  of  history  has 
done  them  too  tardy  justice.  The  forcible  over- 
throw of  Zoroastrian  Mithraism  and  of  English 
monasticism  may  have  been  for  the  providential 
good  of  the  world ;  but  the  manner  in  which  it  was 
done  is  no  less  abominable  and  worthy  of  condem- 
nation. It  is,  and  always  must  be,  against  good 
morals  to  "  do  evil  that  good  may  come,"  and  the 
verdict  of  the  Apostle  against  all  such  iU-doers  re- 
mains unchallenged  :  "  whose  damnation  is  just." 
But  again  history  has  its  revenges,  and  I  confess 
to  a  high  satisfaction  in  being  able  to  contribute 
my  mite  to  such  a  result  in  this  study  of  the  Zo- 
roastrian religion  ;  and  with  this  thought  in  mind 
I  cannot  better  close  this  chapter  than  by  quoting 
a  single  passage  from  its  sacred  books :  "  We  wor- 
ship the  souls  of  the  holy  men  and  women^  horn 
at  any  time  and  in  any  place^  whose  consciences 
struggle^  or  will  struggle^  or  have  struggled  for 
the  good,^^ 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE   GREEK  HOMERIC   TRINITY 

We  now  pass  to  the  third  Aryan  chapter  of 
trinitarian  evolution,  —  in  some  respects  the  most 
remarkable  of  all,  and  of  special  interest  to  the 
Christian  scholar  in  view  of  its  direct  historical 
relation  to  the  evolution  of  the  Christian  trinity. 

The  Greek  religion  first  appears  in  Homer  and 
Hesiod  as  a  fully  developed  polytheism.  The 
instinct  and  love  of  the  beautiful  in  nature  and 
in  art,  which  so  distinguished  the  Greek  people, 
is  well  illustrated  in  their  polytheistic  mythology. 
On  the  ethical  side  the  Greek  gods  and  goddesses 
do  not  appear  to  advantage  when  compared  with 
those  of  other  Ethnic  religions,  especially  with  the 
Indian  or  Zoroastrian  divinities.  Plato  prohibited 
the  reading  of  Homer  in  his  ideal  republic  because 
of  its  immoral  stories.  How  far  this  charge  may 
be  explained  away  by  considerations  drawn  from 
the  naturalistic  origin  and  symbolical  character  of 
the  Greek  mythology  cannot  here  be  fully  dis- 
cussed. There  is  no  doubt,  however,  that  recent 
philological  and  archaeological  studies  have  done 
much  toward  setting  the  matter  in  a  new  light. 
But,  from  the  hterary  and  artistic  point  of  view, 
the  superiority  of  the   Greek   mythology  to  all 


THE  GREEK  HOMERIC  TRINITf  93 

others  known  to  history  is  unquestionable.  The 
Iliad  and  the  Odyssey  are  filled  with  narratives 
and  pictures  in  which  the  Greek  gods  and  god- 
desses are  the  chief  figures  that  are  unrivaled  in 
ancient  literature.  Greek  art,  which  remains  even 
in  its  ruins  to-day  the  wonder  of  the  world,  had  its 
birth  in  the  Greek  religion,  and  it  continued  to 
draw  its  inspiration  from  this  source  throughout 
its  golden  age.  The  sublimest  forms  of  Greek  ar- 
chitecture were  temples,  its  most  perfect  statues 
were  of  the  patron  divinities  of  these  temples,  and 
its  lost  art  of  coloring  was  lavished  on  their  deco- 
ration. The  Parthenon,  built  in  the  days  of  Peri- 
cles, was  a  miracle  in  stone  of  the  religious  genius 
of  Greece. 

I  have  aUuded  to  the  symbolism  which  char- 
acterizes the  Greek  mythology.  Such  symbolism 
is  equally  characteristic  of  aU  mythologies,  and 
it  is  in  part  the  key  to  a  correct  interpretation 
of  them.  The  grotesqueness,  and  even  hideous- 
ness,  to  our  refined  taste,  of  some  mythological 
incidents  and  sculptures  connected  with  the  Ethnic 
mythologies  seem  to  indicate  the  comparatively 
barbarous  character  of  the  people  among  whom 
they  originated.  Like  men,  like  gods.  The 
artistic  superiority  of  Greek  mythology  simply 
proves  the  keener  artistic  sensitiveness  and  crea- 
tive power  of  the  Greek  mind.  In  comparing  the 
different  Ethnic  mythologies,  the  question  is  not 
so  much  one  of  morals  as  it  is  one  of  artistic  men- 
tal development.     It  has  not  been  clearly  under- 


94  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

stood,  until  quite  recently,  how  fundamental 
symbolism  is  in  human  thought  and  language,  and 
how  deeply  imbedded  certain  symbols  are  in  the 
traditions  of  the  race.  It  may  seem  strange  that 
the  immoral  stories  in  Homer  should  not  have 
been  sifted  out  in  the  long  course  of  years  in 
which  those  poems  were  being  gathered  and  edited, 
or  that  the  uncouth  descriptions  and  images  of 
divinities,  such  as  are  found  even  in  Indian  poly- 
theistic literature  and  art,  should  have  held  their 
ground,  and  even  grown  more  and  more  grotesque 
as  Hindoo  culture  advanced  ;  but  it  must  be  re- 
membered that  nothing  is  so  tenacious  in  its  grasp 
on  tradition  or  popular  faith  as  the  use  of  symbols 
which  have  become  venerable  by  time,  however  in- 
artistic they  may  be,  if  they  are  only  expressions 
of  some  truth  that  is  held  in  reverence.  Language 
itself,  which  is  the  great  vehicle  of  all  communicar 
tion  among  men,  is  essentially  a  system  of  symbols. 
Every  religion  is  full  of  symbolism,  not  only  in  its 
forms  of  worship,  but  also  in  its  dogmas. 

This  is  weU  illustrated  in  the  sign  of  the  cross, 
which  in  Christian  times  has  been  made  so  es- 
pecially significant  of  Christian  truth.  It  may  be 
a  surprise  to  some  of  my  readers  to  be  told  that 
this  symbol  of  the  cross  is  as  old  as  history  itself. 
Indeed,  its  origin  is  hidden  in  prehistoric  times. 
The  Greek  or  Maltese  cross,  with  its  four  arms 
of  equal  length,  which  is  worn  by  Koman  Popes 
on  the  breast,  appears  on  the  breasts  of  Assyrian 
kings  nine  or  ten  centuries   before  the  birth  of 


THE  GREEK  HOMERIC  TRINITY  95 

Christ,  as  is  witnessed  to  by  Assyrio-Babylonian 
cylinders  in  the  British  Museum.  If  these  clay 
tablets  were  unaccompanied  by  vouchers  their 
genuineness  might  well  be  suspected,  but  when  we 
learn  that  evidence  which  cannot  be  gainsaid  and 
which  has  come  to  us  from  every  quarter  of  the 
world  is  at  hand  in  marvelous  abundance,  aU  doubt 
becomes  unavailing.  Perhaps  there  is  no  more 
important,  and  surely  no  more  wonderful,  archaeo- 
logical line  of  recent  discovery  than  that  which  has 
dealt  with  the  subject  of  symbols  and  the  deep- 
seated  character  of  their  influence  on  mankind 
from  the  beginning  of  human  life  on  this  earth. 
These  symbols  are  almost  entirely  of  a  religious 
and  sacred  character,  representing  human  concep- 
tions of  the  mysteries  of  nature  and  life  and  divin- 
ity. We  have  seen  how  prominent  in  all  the  early 
Ethnic  religions  was  the  worship  of  the  sun  as  the 
great  representative  in  the  visible  world  of  divine 
power  and  life  and  blessing  to  men.  The  sun-god, 
by  whatever  name  he  was  called,  in  the  different 
languages  or  mythologies  of  nations,  was  the  most 
universally  venerated  divinity  in  the  whole  pan- 
theon. It  is  no  wonder,  then,  that  symbols  of  the 
sun  should  be  found  to  be  the  most  ancient  and 
universal  of  all.  These  symbols  were  varied  in 
form,  according  to  the  aspect  of  the  god  repre- 
sented. The  circle  and  the  wheel  are  illustrations, 
representing  the  form  of  the  sun  and  his  course 
through  the  heavens,  and  also  his  vitalizing  power. 
The  wheel  suggests  motion,  and  its  spokes  suggest 


96  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

the  sun's  rays  which  penetrate  everywhere,  impart- 
ing heat  and  life  and  light  in  every  form.  These 
religious  ideas  were  the  nuclei  of  others.  A  whole 
theology  and  philosophy  might  be  symbolized  by 
the  circle  and  wheel.  How  easily  they  may  sug- 
gest eternal  motion  and  its  eternal  source,  and 
hence  the  eternal  divine  power  and  goodness  and 
benevolence?  But  among  all  these  symbols  the 
cross  stands  out  as  supreme  in  its  dignity  and  in 
the  universality  of  its  use.  It  is  to  be  found  in  all 
parts  of  the  world,  from  Iceland  to  the  Ganges, 
and  in  both  hemispheres.  Historical  investiga- 
tions have  wholly  failed  to  trace  its  origin.  Anti- 
quarian excavations  have  revealed  it  everywhere. 
Schliemann  found  it  in  the  ruins  of  prehistoric 
Troy.  It  has  been  figured  not  only  on  the  breasts 
of  Babylonian  kings,  on  the  vestments  of  Greek 
gods  and  goddesses,  —  on  the  tunic  of  Athene  and 
on  the  breast  of  Apollo,  —  but  also  on  tombs  and 
altars  in  Gaul,  Spain,  and  Scandinavia.  If  its 
exact  significance  cannot  always  be  ascertained,  its 
general  character  is  clear  beyond  dispute.  The 
conclusion  forced  upon  us  is  that  the  cross,  as  a 
sacred  symbol,  belonged  to  the  earliest  traditions 
of  the  race,  and  represented  religious  ideas  which 
formed  the  original  credo  of  the  ancestors  of  man- 
kind. 

The  old  idea  that  this  sign  is  original  with 
Christianity  is  of  course  exploded.  The  new  sig- 
nificance that  was  given  to  it  and  the  way  in  which 
it  was  developed  after  the  time  of  Constantine  in 


THE  GREEK  HOMERIC   TRINITY  97 

the  fourth  century  are  matters  of  Christian  his- 
tory into  which  I  cannot  go  at  length.  For  the 
sake  of  those,  however,  who  are  not  critically  ac- 
quainted with  the  historical  origins  of  Christian- 
ity, I  wiU  say  that  the  symbol  of  the  cross  in  its 
original  and  ancient  significance  is  to  be  entirely 
distinguished  from  the  meaning  that  came  to  be 
attached  to  it  in  Christian  tradition.  The  new 
Christian  symbolism  was  connected  with  the  man- 
ner of  Christ's  death.  Whether  the  wood  on  which 
he  was  impaled  was  cruciform  is  uncertain.  The 
Greek  word  a-Tavp6<s  means  an  upright  stake.  A 
cross-piece  was  not  essential.  The  more  common 
form  of  it  in  Christ's  day  seems  to  have  been  a  T. 
This  ignominious  instrument  of  punishment  came 
to  be  idealized  by  Christian  believers  into  a  sign 
of  glorification  and  triumph.  Whether  there  was 
at  first  any  direct  historical  connection  between 
the  old  Ethnic  symbol  and  the  new  Christian  sign 
is  quite  obscure.  Probability  is  against  it,  for 
the  two  figures  on  which  the  symbolism  was  based 
were  at  first  quite  unlike.  There  was  little  resem- 
blance between  the  equal-armed  cross  which  was 
the  usual  religious  symbol  of  the  Ethnic  religions 
and  the  cn-avpds  or  upright  stake,  even  with  the 
added  cross-piece  at  the  top,  such  as  was  used  in 
crucifixion.  The  so-called  Latin  cross,  which  was 
distinguished  by  the  lengthening  of  the  lower  arm, 
was  a  much  later  Western  form  :  while  the  cruci- 
fix in  which  Christ  is  represented  as  hanging  on 
the  cross  did  not  come  into  use  as  a  symbol  until 


98  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

as  late  as  the  seventh  century.  Thus  the  very- 
forms  of  the  Ethnic  and  Christian  crosses  suggest 
a  whoUy  different  origin.  No  doubt  the  Christian 
symbol  was  at  first  whoUy  independent  of  the  pa- 
gan, deriving  its  significance  from  the  method  of 
Christ's  death.  But  when  we  take  into  view  the 
fact  that  the  Christian  church  grew  largely  out  of 
pagan  soil  and  that  many  ancestral  pagan  ideas 
and  customs  were  merely  transformed  and  adopted 
into  the  new  faith,  it  ceases  to  be  surprising  that 
the  Ethnic  symbol  of  the  cross  and  even  its  forms 
should  gradually  become  blended  with  those  of  the 
new  Christian  religion.  Certainly  the  original 
difference  between  the  significance  of  the  Ethnic 
symbolism  and  that  of  the  Christian  was  radical. 
The  pre-Christian  cross,  in  its  various  forms,  has 
nothing  to  do  with  death  or  any  mode  of  it:  it 
rather  symbolizes  life,  material  and  spiritual.  One 
of  its  most  common  forms,  found  everywhere,  is 
the  so-called  swastika  or  gammated  cross  —  a 
Hindoo  word  taking  its  name  from  the  bending  of 
the  four  ends.  It  has  been  suggested,  and  with 
not  a  little  probability,  that  the  curving  of  these 
ends  is  intended  to  represent  the  idea  of  motion 
or  gyration,  like  that  of  the  wheel.  These  two 
symbols  of  the  cross  and  the  wheel  are  closely 
related  and  are  often  found  together,  and  some- 
times were  united  into  one  composite  emblem ;  and 
it  is  my  own  impression  that  the  original  idea  be- 
hind both  symbols  is  that  of  motion  as  the  starting- 
point  of  all  life  and  of  the  world  itself.     The  idea 


THE  GREEK  HOMERIC   TRINITY  99 

of  God  as  the  divine  mover  is  not  far  off.  This 
view  of  the  origin  of  things,  which  was  thus  ex- 
pressed by  the  imaginative  faculties  of  early  man 
in  symbolic  forms,  was  adopted  by  Aristotle  and 
made  the  key  to  his  philosophy,  in  his  view  that 
the  eternal  movement  of  the  world  necessarily  im- 
plied an  eternal  mover  and  that  such  a  principle 
of  motion  could  be  none  other  than  God, 

I  have  referred  to  the  obscurity  attaching  to  the 
way  in  which  the  Ethnic  cross,  which  was  a  sacred 
symbol  of  life,  motion,  the  world,  and  Deity,  be- 
came confounded  with  the  Christian  cross  as  a 
symbol  of  Christ's  redeeming  death.  The  early 
Christian  Fathers  frequently  allude  to  the  form  of 
Christ's  death,  and  the  term  cross  becomes  a  com- 
mon expression  for  it.  They  also  distinguish  this 
term  from  the  pagan  cross,  with  which  they  show 
themselves  acquainted,  —  expressly  denying  that 
they  are  chargeable  with  any  superstitious  use  of 
the  cross  as  an  image  or  symbolical  figure.  The 
practice  of  making  the  sign  of  the  cross  with  the 
hand  appears  quite  early.  Tertullian  describes  it 
as  common  in  his  day,  but  the  use  of  material 
crosses  is  considerably  later.  Constantine  set  this 
fashion  by  affixing  a  cross  to  his  laharum  or  ban- 
ner, and  also  by  putting  crosses  on  churches  and 
palaces.  From  Constantine's  day  the  cross  be- 
came the  great  symbol  of  Christianity  as  a  power 
of  life  through  death,  —  the  instrument  of  death 
being  thus  transfigured  into  the  sign  of  a  redeemed 
and  glorified  life.     As  the  Ethnic  religions  grad- 


100  THE  ETHNIC   TRINITIES 

ually  decayed  and  finally  became  well-nigh  extinct 
in  the  Roman  world,  the  Ethnic  conception  of  the 
cross  as  a  sacred  sign  or  symbol  faded  out  and  the 
Christian  view  took  its  place,  or  it  may  rather  be 
said  that  the  two  conceptions  were  gradually  and 
unconsciously  blended  together. 

It  is  interesting  to  examine  the  remains  of 
Christian  art  in  the  catacombs  or  early  Christian 
burial-places,  and  in  early  churches,  and  there  note 
the  curious  mixture  of  pagan  and  Christian  sym- 
bols of  the  cross.  For  example,  there  is  figured 
on  a  Christian  monument  together  with  the  mono- 
gram of  Christ  the  swastilca  or  gammated  cross, 
which  is  a  purely  Ethnic  symbol  and  which  tended 
to  disappear  in  subsequent  Christian  times.  This 
peculiar  form  of  the  cross,  with  its  four  ends  bent  as 
if  to  symbolize  motion,  is  found  again  and  again  in 
the  catacombs ;  but  the  most  remarkable  example, 
perhaps,  is  a  mosaic  of  Christ  represented  as  the 
Good  Shepherd,  on  whose  tunic  the  gammated 
cross  is  twice  pictured.  These  paintings  show  that 
the  artist  had  either  confounded  or  consciously 
blended  together  Ethnic  and  Christian  ideas. 
Such  amalgamations  are  not  isolated  cases;  they 
are  common  in  early  Christian  art.  In  the  cata- 
comb of  Saint  Calixtus  the  pagan  Orpheus  is 
painted  as  captivating  the  wild  beasts  with  his 
lyre  directly  under  the  Virgin  Mary  and  the  Child 
Jesus ;  and  the  pagan  myth  of  Cupid  and  Psyche 
is  found  pictured  on  Christian  sarcophagi.  These 
examples  only  illustrate  the  persistence  of  ancient 


THE  GREEK  HOMERIC   TRINITY  101 

survivals,  especially  in  the  form  of  religious  sym- 
bolism. Perhaps  the  most  curious  of  them  all  is 
seen  in  the  custom  of  the  Popes  of  Rome,  continued 
to  this  day,  of  wearing  on  their  breasts  the  Greek 
cross,  —  a  close  imitation  of  the  cross  worn  by  As- 
syrian kings  in  the  ninth  century  B.  c.  We  should 
expect  a  Roman  Pope  to  wear  a  Latin  cross ;  yet 
the  Greek  cross  is  a  direct  historical  survival  of 
the  Assyrian  cross.  Christianity  was  the  off- 
spring of  Judaism,  as  Judaism  was  in  its  turn  the 
offshoot  of  the  Assyrio-Babylonian  Chaldaeism. 
Abraham  "  The  Hebrew,"  through  his  descendants, 
is  the  direct  historical  connecting  link  between  the 
Assyrian  king  and  the  Roman  Pope.^ 

^  A  good  example  of  a  similar  transfer  of  a  pagan  symbol  to 
Cliristian  use  is  the  nimbus  or  aureole,  which  began  to  be  used  as 
a  Christian  sign  of  saintliness  or  divinity  in  the  fifth  or  sixth  cen- 
tury. Before  this  it  had  become  common  as  a  sign  of  dignity  on 
the  heads  of  emperors  and  empresses.  Its  origin  is  hid  in  anti- 
quity. Seme  regard  it  as  derived  from  India,  where  it  encircled 
the  heads  of  the  Hindoo  mythological  gods.  In  Ethnic  Greek 
and  Latin  literature  the  nimbus  represented  the  glory  that  in- 
vested a  divine  being.  Thus  Virg^  describes  Juno  as  "  nimbo 
succincta"  Later  Christian  art  made  it  a  special  symbol  of 
Christ's  divine  nature.  The  Virgin  Mary  soon  received  the  same 
sign,  and  subsequently  it  became  a  perquisite  of  all  specially  holy 
personages.  There  is,  no  doubt,  a  close  relation  between  the 
Ethnic  cross  and  the  nimbus  as  sacred  symbols.  Both  seem  to 
be  connected  with  the  sun,  and  represent  different  aspects  of  it. 
It  is  not  a  far  cry  that  they  should  be  transferred  to  Christian 
symbolism  as  signs  of  the  "  Sun  of  righteousness."  A  curious  il- 
lustration of  the  amalgamation  of  the  two  signs  and  of  their  com- 
mon derivation  from  Ethnic  sources  is  given  in  a  mosaic  of  the 
sixth  century  in  a  Christian  church  at  Ravenna,  where  the  Em- 
peror Justinian  is  painted  with  a  nimbus  around  his  head.  Near 
him  stands  the  Archbishop  Maximianua,  who  holds  a  LcUin  cross 


102  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

I  trust  that  this  digression  has  not  been  with- 
out its  interest  and  instruction.  I  have  been  led 
to  introduce  it  in  order  to  enforce  the  fact  that 
the  Ethnic  polytheistic  mythology  was  essentially 
a  system  of  symbolism.  This  was  preeminently 
true  of  the  Aryan  rehgions,  which  were  forms  of 
nature  worship.  Their  divinities  were  largely  im- 
personations of  natural  forces  and  phenomena ; 
and  in  this  personifying  process  the  Greek  genius 
found  f uU  play.  In  fact  all  the  Ethnic  theogonies 
and  cosmogonies  are  mythological  stories  which 
are  the  work  of  the  imagination  of  early  man, 
using  for  material  the  natural  phenomena  in  the 
midst   of  which   he   lived.     The   only  difference 

in  his  hands,  while  a  soldier  near  by  grasps  a  wheel-shaped  shield 
on  which  is  figured  the  monogram  of  Christ,  —  the  six  limbs  of 
the  monogram  clearly  representing  the  spokes  of  the  wheel. 
But  more  sig^nificant  still  is  the  opposite  mosaic  of  the  Empress 
Theodora.  She  also  has  a  nimbus  around  her  head,  and,  further, 
two  Greek  crosses  distinctly  marked  on  her  breast ;  while  the 
garments  of  one  of  her  attendants  are  covered  with  small  Greek 
crosses,  and  a  curtain  has  for  its  chief  ornament  fig^ures  of  the 
swastika  or  cross  with  bent  arms.  Whether  consciously  or  not, 
here  are  brought  together  in  a  single  series  of  Christian  mosaics 
symbols  of  most  diverse  origin  in  form  and  meaning  —  the  circle, 
the  wheel,  the  Greek  cross,  the  gammated  swastika,  the  Latin 
cross,  the  decussated  cross  or  monogram  of  Christ.  Perhaps  the 
most  interesting  feature  of  all  is  the  Greek  cross  on  the  breast  of 
Theodora.  It  is  another  historical  link  between  the  Ethnic  As- 
syrian kings  and  the  Christian  Popes,  giving  further  evidence 
that  the  tradition  of  the  Ethnic  cross  as  a  sacred  religious  symbol 
was  never  broken,  but  only  changed  in  its  symbolical  character 
with  the  lapse  of  time.  For  a  full  account  of  the  history  of  the 
cross  as  a  mystical  symbol  and  of  the  persistency  of  such  sym- 
bolical survivals,  with  many  illustrations,  see  La  Bdigion  des 
Gaidois,  par  Alexandre  Bertrand,  Paris,  1897. 


THE  GREEK  HOMERIC  TRINITY  103 

between  the  Greek  myth-maker  and  his  Aryan 
or  Semitic  or  Turanian  neighbor  was  that  his 
imaginative  fancy  was  somehow  of  a  finer  mould 
than  theirs.  Whether  his  religious  consciousness 
was  more  fully  developed  is  another  question,  the 
answer  to  which  must  depend  on  a  deeper  study  of 
the  Greek  character  and  religion.  Certainly  the 
two  great  poems  known  as  the  Homeric  belong  to 
a  class  of  literature  that  immensely  out-distances 
all  the  products  of  the  other  Ethnic  religions  in 
the  mythological  age,  and  make  us  wonder  whence 
they  came,  and  what  was  the  real  source  of  their 
inspiration. 

Opening  the  Iliad  with  the  view  of  seeking  the 
trinitarian  elements  which  may  be  found,  at  first 
sight  its  polytheism  seems  to  overshadow  the 
whole  scene.  Gods  without  number,  and  of  all 
sorts  and  conditions  from  the  highest  to  the  lowest, 
are  inextricably  mingled  with  demi-gods  and  heroes 
and  human  beings.  But  ere  long  a  principle  of  di- 
vision among  them  appears.  The  oldest  Greek 
trinitarianism  seems  to  have  arisen  from  the  trinal 
character  of  nature,  as  it  appeared  to  unscientific 
minds,  with  its  three  regions  of  land,  water,  and  sky. 
Hence  the  first  nature-trinity,  consisting  of  Zeus, 
Poseidon,  and  Hades,  —  Zeus  being  the  great  god 
of  the  sky,  Poseidon  the  god  of  the  sea,  and  Hades 
the  god  of  the  earth  and  of  the  underworld.  The 
generative,  or  family  idea,  also  appears  in  this  first 
triad.  Zeus,  Poseidon,  and  Hades  were  brothers 
who  divided  among  themselves  the  common  inher- 


104  THE  ETHNIC   TRINITIES 

itance.  Such  is  the  myth  as  given  more  fuUy  in 
the  Theogony  of  Hesiod.  But  though  it  is  plainly 
found  in  the  background  of  the  Homeric  mytho- 
logy, it  is  already  supplanted  by  a  later  trinitarian 
evolution,  namely,  the  trinity  of  Zeus,  Here,  and 
Athene.  Of  the  older  triad  only  Zeus  remains, 
which  means  that  the  Olympian  brother,  that  is, 
the  sky-god,  has  reduced  his  rival  brothers  to  a 
sort  of  subjection,  and  has  installed  himself  at  the 
head  of  the  whole  pantheon.  Zeus  is  henceforth 
the  "father  of  gods  and  men,"  and  supreme  over 
all  things.  In  this  second  stage  of  trinitarian 
movement  the  naturalistic  principle  yields  to  the 
generative  or  family  idea.  The  members  of  the  new 
trinity  are  aU  sky-gods,  and  are  united  together  by 
the  closest  family  relationship.  Here  or  Hera  is 
both  the  sister  and  the  wife  of  Zeus,  and  hence 
shares  with  him  his  regal  supremacy  and  honors. 
Athene  also  is  the  daughter  of  Zeus,  being  doubly 
related  to  him,  since  she  is  "  dvSpoOia,"  that  is,  a 
"  man-goddess,"  which  means  that  she  was  bom 
directly  through  her  father's  agency  without  a 
mother,  —  the  legend  being  that  she  sprang  from 
the  head  of  Zeus.  This  rather  startling  myth  is 
only  the  opposite  side,  carried  to  its  extreme,  of  the 
very  common  myth  or  legend,  illustrated  in  many 
cases,  of  a  parentage  from  the  mother  without  a 
father  except  in  some  unnatural  way.  The  close 
connection  between  Here  and  Athene  is  visible  all 
through  the  Iliad ;  and  their  common  subordination 
to  Zeus  is  clearly  defined.     But  the  subordination 


THE  GREEK  HOMERIC  TRINITY  105 

principle  is  also  carried  to  the  third  person  of  this 
Homeric  trinity.  Athene  is  as  much  subordinate 
to  Here  as  Here  is  to  Zeus,  and  here  in  this  relation 
of  subordination  comes  already  to  view  the  media- 
tive  principle  which  we  have  found  so  characteristic 
of  the  Ethnic  trinitarianism,  and  which  will  have 
a  remarkable  development  in  the  further  progress 
of  Greek  thought.  In  the  Iliad,  Athene  is  usually 
the  messenger  sent  by  Zeus  or  Here  on  errands  of 
help  and  mercy.  Thus  Here  sends  her  to  the 
Grecian  host  on  an  embassy  of  peace,  "  With  thy 
gentle  words  restrain  thou  every  man."  She  is 
often  made  a  mediator  between  men  and  Zeus. 
Prayers  are  offered  to  her  by  Greek  heroes  on  the 
eve  of  battle.  Thus  Diomede  prays  :  "  Rejoice,  O 
goddess,  for  to  thee,  first  of  aU  the  inunortals  in 
Olympus,  will  we  caU  for  aid."  And  so  Odysseus : 
"Harken,  goddess,  come  thou  a  good  helper  of 
my  feet."  The  helpful  and  gracious  character 
of  Athene  is  thus  made  conspicuous.  Once  she  is 
compared  to  "  a  mother." 

Turning  next  to  the  Odyssey,  at  once  we  per- 
ceive a  notable  change.  Plainly  it  is  a  work  of 
later  date  than  the  Iliad,  and  represents  a  later 
stage  of  trinitarian  evolution.  Zeus  remains  still 
at  the  head  of  the  Homeric  trinity,  but  Here  re- 
tires into  the  background,  being  mentioned  but 
twice,  and  Athene,  who  was  so  subordinate  in  the 
Iliad,  becomes  from  the  outset  the  central  divine 
figure  of  the  epic,  and  remains  such  to  the  very  end. 
It  is  noticeable  also  that  ApoUo,  who  in  the  Iliad 


106  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

held  the  fourth  place  in  the  order  of  the  heavenly 
gods,  in  the  Odyssey  rises  to  the  place  of  Here. 
He  is  a  son  of  Zeus,  and  especially  favored  by  him. 
Four  several  times  Apollo  is  united  with  Zeus  and 
Athene  as  forming  a  sort  of  trinity  in  adjurations 
and  prayers,  as,  for  example,  when  Telemachus 
addressed  his  mother,  Penelope,  "  Would  to  Father 
Zeus,  and  Athene,  and  Apollo  that  the  wooers  in 
our  haUs  were  even  now  thus  vanquished."  The 
order  of  the  triad  we  note  is  also  changed.  Athene 
has  risen  from  the  third  place,  which  she  always 
held  in  the  Iliad,  to  the  second,  and  she  holds  this 
rank  in  every  adjuration.  Thus  her  very  position 
in  the  trinity  seems  to  fit  her  for  the  mediating 
mission  which  she  assumes  and  sustains  through- 
out |the  poem.  It  sheds  a  new  and  interesting 
light  on  the  mediatorial  character  of  the  second 
Person  of  the  Christian  trinity,  when  we  find  the 
same  mediating  function  joined  to  the  second  Per- 
son in  so  many  Ethnic  triads;  for  example,  Mar- 
duk  in  the  Babylonian  triad,  Vishnu  in  the  Hin- 
doo, Mithra  in  the  Zoroastrian,  and  Athene  in  the 
Greek  Homeric. 

This  chapter  in  the  Greek  trinitarianism  is  so 
suggestive  and  important  that  it  demands  a  some- 
what closer  study.  The  Odyssey,  as  compared 
with  the  Iliad,  is  much  fuller  of  human  interest. 
The  Iliad  is  a  true  martial  epic,  enacted  on  a  wide 
stage,  with  a  grand  superhuman  machinery  at 
work  to  carry  out  the  counsels  of  Zeus,  in  the 
midst  of   the  plottings   and   coimter-plottings   of 


THE  GREEK  HOMERIC  TRINITY         107 

divine,  superhuman  and  human  agencies.  The 
Odyssey  is  no  less  an  epic,  but  it  revolves  around 
a  single  person,  Odysseus,  who  is  the  true  hero  of 
the  poem,  and  gives  it  its  name.  The  great  theme 
of  the  whole  action  is  the  adventures  of  this  Greek 
hero  in  his  efforts  to  return  to  his  home  in  spite 
of  the  machinations  of  Poseidon,  the  ruler  of  the 
waves.  Thus  a  personal  human  interest  gathers 
around  the  story  from  the  start.  But  this  human 
element  is  made  still  more  powerfid  by  the  en- 
trance of  another  person,  whose  sad  fortunes,  grow- 
ing more  and  more  pathetic  to  the  last,  form  one 
of  the  sweetest  idyls  of  all  literature — the  noble 
and  lovely  Penelope,  the  patiently  waiting  wife  of 
the  long-lost  husband.  No  wonder  her  story  has 
touched  the  hearts  of  men  as  few  others  have.  In 
the  ruins  of  Pompeii  there  stiQ  is  to  be  seen,  on 
the  walls  of  a  room,  in  colors  as  fresh  as  if  painted 
yesterday,  a  picture  of  Ulysses  and  Penelope  when 
they  first  met  after  his  return  home.  He  has  not 
yet  made  himseM  known  to  her.  Disguised  as  a 
beggar,  as  he  was,  she  plainly  struggles  in  her 
thoughts  and  feelings  between  despair  and  doubt 
and  growing  hope.  It  is  a  scene  that  is  entran- 
cing in  its  simple  human  realism.  The  face  and 
attitude  of  Penelope  is  one  that  haunts  the  specta- 
tor ever  after. 

Yet  the  true  central  personage  of  the  Odyssey 
is  neither  Ulysses  nor  Penelope.  They  are  but 
counters  in  the  divine  game  which  has  for  its 
source  of  interest  and  meaning  the  active  agency 


108  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

of  the  goddess  Athene,  mediating  between  heaven 
and  earth,  and  representing  the  divine  compassion 
and  love  in  her  efforts,  crowned  at  last  with  tri- 
umphant success,  to  save  a  sorely  tried  man  from 
the  toils  of  harsh  fate,  and  restore  him  to  home, 
wife,  son,  and  happiness.  I  have  spoken  of  Pe- 
nelope as  perhaps  the  most  attractive  woman  in 
Greek  literature,  but  her  human  picture  fades  be- 
fore the  sublime  form  of  the  "man-goddess"  as 
she  plays  her  part  of  a  divine  mediator  and  mes- 
senger and  friend  of  men.  Such  a  story  ought  not 
to  be  given  in  any  abstract,  but  read  in  full,  to 
feel  its  real  force  and  significance ;  but  I  will  try 
to  set  forth  its  pith,  keeping  in  mind  the  point  of 
view  from  which  I  have  approached  it. 

When  the  action  of  the  epic  begins,  Ulysses  has 
been  a  wanderer  for  ten  years.  Penelope  is  nearly 
at  her  wit's  end  in  her  devices  to  postpone  a  deci- 
sion concerning  the  wooers  who  are  wasting  her 
substance  and  daily  becoming  more  imperious  in 
their  wooing.  The  poem  opens  with  a  council  of 
the  Olympian  gods,  in  which  Athene  intercedes 
with  Zeus  for  Odysseus:  "My  heart  is  rent  for 
Odysseus  the  hapless  one,  who  far  from  his  friends 
this  long  while  suffereth  affliction  on  a  sea-girt 
isle."  The  heart  of  Zeus  is  touched  and  he  con- 
sents to  assist  his  daughter  in  her  mission  of  res- 
cue. Athene  at  once  descends  to  Ithaca  to  stir  up 
Telemachus,  Odysseus's  son,  to  attempt  to  find  his 
father.  In  this  mission  she  assumes  "  the  sem- 
blance of  a  stranger.  Menus,  the  captain  of  the 


THE  GREEK  HOMERIC   TRINITY  109 

Taphians."  This  is  the  first  of  several  assump- 
tions of  a  human  form,  or  divine  incarnations. 
She  next  appears  as  Telemachus  himself,  going 
around  among  the  citizens  and  inciting  them  to 
assist  him  in  his  quest.  Her  third  appearance  is 
in  the  form  of  Mentor,  an  old  friend  of  Odysseus, 
and  in  that  form  she  accompanies  Telemachus  as 
his  adviser  and  friend,  in  his  search  among  his 
father's  comrades  for  some  knowledge  of  his  where- 
abouts. These  incarnations  are  repeated  contin- 
ually in  various  ways  throughout  the  poem,  and 
illustrate  the  directness  of  Athene's  mediatorial 
agency  in  her  relations  with  men.  She  does  not 
remain  "  in  the  heavenly  places,"  but  breaks  the  veil 
between  heaven  and  earth  and  comes  into  visible 
contact  with  the  object  of  her  care,  now  as  a  man, 
now  as  a  woman,  anon  as  a  bird.  Could  the  com- 
pleteness of  the  divine  condescension  be  more  viv- 
idly disclosed  ?  One  of  the  most  suggestive  touches 
of  the  Homeric  realism  is  where  Athene,  in  the 
form  of  Mentor,  accompanying  Telemachus  to  Py- 
los,  the  home  of  Nestor,  is  invited,  as  if  a  mortal 
man,  to  take  "  the  cup  of  honied  wine  "  and  offer 
it  in  prayer  "  since  all  men  stand  in  need  of  the 
gods,"  and  herself  prays  to  Poseidon  that  "  Tele- 
machus and  I  may  return  when  we  have  accom- 
plished that  for  which  we  came  hither  with  our  swift 
black  ship."  "Now  as  she  prayed  on  this  wise, 
Jierself  the  while  was  fulfilling  the  prayer J^  Or 
is  anything  more  touching  than  what  soon  follows, 
when  the  aged  Nestor,  indulging  in  reminiscences 


110  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

of  the  Trojan  war,  and  striving  to  comfort  the 
young  Telemachus  concerning  the  wooers  that  were 
"  planning  mischief  within  the  halls,"  uttered  these 
words  in  the  very  presence  of  Athene  herself: 
"Ah,  if  but  gray-eyed  Athene  herself  were  in- 
clined to  love  thee,  as  once  she  cared  exceedingly 
for  the  renowned  Odysseus  in  the  land  of  the  Tro- 
jans where  we  Achaeans  were  sore  afflicted,  —  for 
never  yet  have  I  seen  the  gods  show  forth  such 
love  as  then  did  Pallas  Athene  standing  manifest 
by  him,  —  if  she  would  be  pleased  so  to  love  thee 
and  to  care  for  thee,  then  might  certain  of  them 
clean  forget  their  marriage,"  aU  unconsciously 
declaring  what  was  already  true,  and  soon  to  be 
manifested  in  the  wooers'  doom. 

But  now  the  scene  changes.  Meanwhile  the 
wooers  are  becoming  more  and  more  clamorous, 
and  the  heart  of  Penelope  is  growing  sadder  and 
more  despairing.  She  prays  to  Athene,  who  "  hears 
her  prayer,"  and  rushes  to  her  help.  This  time 
she  "  fashions  a  phantom,  after  the  likeness  of  a 
woman,"  who  comes  into  Penelope's  sleepless 
chamber  and  cheers  her  with  the  assurance  that 
"a  friend  who  hath  power,  even  PaUas  Athene, 
pitieth  thee  in  thy  sorrow,  and  hath  sent  me  forth 
to  speak  these  words  unto  thee."  And  now  again 
the  scene  changes  to  Odysseus,  himseK,  who  has 
been  detained  for  eight  years  by  the  nymph  Ca- 
lypso, and  is  vainly  sighing  to  be  permitted  to 
continue  his  voyage  home.  Athene  has  instigated 
Zeus  to  interfere  again  in  his  behalf.     Odysseus 


THE  GREEK  HOMERIC   TRINITY  111 

once  more  resumes  his  course  homeward  and 
reaches  the  shore  of  Phaeacia.  On  his  way  to  the 
city  of  Alcinoiis  the  king,  Athene  meets  him  in  the 
guise  of  "  a  young  maiden  carrying  a  pitcher,"  and 
offers  to  conduct  him  to  her  father's  palace.  As 
they  walked  through  the  midst  of  the  Phaeacian 
mariners,  the  goddess  "shed  a  wondrous  mist 
about  him,  for  the  favor  that  she  bore  him  in  her 
heart."  The  king  receives  him  kindly,  and  the 
long  story  of  his  ten  years'  adventures  follows. 
Then  Alcinoiis  sends  him  on  his  way  and  he  is 
landed  on  the  shores  of  his  own  country.  Here 
the  last  great  act  may  be  said  to  begin.  To  at- 
tempt to  describe  it  would  only  mar  its  thrilling 
beauty  and  charm.  Enough  to  say  that  Athene 
now  comes  into  the  foreground  more  completely 
than  ever  and  becomes  the  inspiring  mover  and 
conductor  of  the  whole  final  line  of  action  by 
which  Odysseus  is  made  known  to  his  son  and 
friends,  the  wooers  are  vanquished  and  slaugh- 
tered, and  Penelope,  the  constant  wife,  is  restored 
to  her  husband's  arms  and  to  the  old  life  and 
joy.  Not  a  single  step  is  taken,  not  a  deed  is 
done,  but  "  by  the  grace  of  Athene."  The  closing 
scene  is  full  of  the  divine  aspect  of  mercy.  The 
Ithacans  determine  to  revenge  the  death  of  the 
wooers,  and  atta<}k  Odysseus  and  his  friends, 
but  through  strength  given  by  Athene  in  answer 
to  the  prayer  of  the  aged  Laertes  the  attack  is 
repulsed,  and  all  the  attacking  party  would  have 
been   slain   had   not  Athene,  once  more   in   the 


112  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

form  of  Mentor,  called  aloud :  "  Hold  your  hands 
from  fierce  fighting,  ye  men  of  Ithaca,  that  ye  may 
be  parted  quickly  without  bloodshed."  Thus  the 
battle  was  stayed.  The  Odyssey  closes  with  these 
words:  "Thereafter  Athene  set  a  covenant  be- 
tween them  with  sacrifice,  she,  the  daughter  of 
Zeus,  lord  of  the  sBgis,  in  the  likeness  of  Mentor 
both  in  fashion  and  in  voice."  It  cannot  be  lost 
sight  of  in  this  sweet  cantata  of  "  Peace  on  earth, 
good  will  to  men,"  that  Athene,  who  has  wrought 
this  peaceful  result  and  sealed  it  with  a  covenant, 
leaves  the  scene  "  in  fashion  as  a  man."  I  know 
not  how  this  sketch  may  affect  others,  but  for 
myself,  as  I  lay  down  the  Odyssey,  I  do  it  with  the 
clear  conviction  that  as  a  religious  poem  it  stands 
unrivaled  in  Ethnic  literature.  Surely  its  picture 
of  the  divine  character,  as  revealed  in  the  Homeric 
trinity,  especially  in  its  two  foremost  members,  is 
one  of  marvelous  dignity  and  power,  shading  con- 
tinually into  an  ineffable  lovableness  and  grace. 
Who  the  creator  of  this  wonderful  poem  was  can- 
not be  known.  It  comes  to  us  out  of  the  shadows 
of  the  prehistoric  world.  But  the  creation  itself, 
in  its  three  chief  characters  of  Odysseus,  Penelope, 
and  above  all  Athene,  is  in  my  view  par  excellence 
the  supreme  vision  of  Aryan  faith.  The  Homeric 
conception  of  Athene  reaches  the  highest  water 
mark  of  Greek  religious  thought,  -^schylus  and 
Sophocles  may  have  struck  a  few  deeper  and 
higher  notes,  but  the  Odyssey  remains  the  true 
Greek  Bhagavat-Gita,  the  "  Divine  Song." 


THE  GREEK  HOMERIC   TRINITY  113 

I  cannot  leave  this  great  religious  poem  without 
alluding  to  one  other  instructive  feature  of  it, 
namely,  that  Athene,  the  second  mediating  person 
of  the  Homeric  trinity,  is  a  woman,  thus  repre- 
senting the  feminine  element  in  human  nature. 
The  introduction  of  a  woman  into  the  central 
place  of  mediator  in  the  triad  is  a  new  step  of 
evolution  in  the  Ethnic  trinitarianism.  It  wiU 
appear  later  in  the  Egyptian  triad  of  Osiris,  Isis, 
and  Horns,  where  Isis,  the  sister  and  wife  of 
Osiris,  will  assume  a  sort  of  mediatorial  role,  and 
will  become  one  of  the  most  popular  of  the  foreign 
divinities  in  later  Roman  times.  But  Isis  is  only 
a  faded  image  of  Athene.  In  the  Greek  "  man- 
goddess,"  "  the  eternal  womanly "  of  Goethe's 
Faust  finds  its  highest  expression.  If  Christ,  ac- 
cording to  Paul's  description  of  him,  apparently 
drawn  from  Philo,  is  "the  man  from  heaven," 
Athene  is  "the  woman  from  heaven"  as  truly. 
When  we  seek  for  the  completest  expression  of 
that  form  of  mediatorship  which  manifests  it- 
self most  clearly  and  attractively  to  satisfy  our 
human  needs,  is  it  not  the  form  of  motherhood? 
Scripture  itself  bears  us  out  in  this  affirmation. 
The  prophet  makes  God  to  say  that  he  will  com- 
fort us  as  "one  whom  his  mother  comforteth." 
No  figure  surely  is  fuller  of  the  divine  love  and 
compassion  than  this  one.  One  cannot  read  the 
Odyssey  without  being  struck  with  the  true 
motherly  character  of  Athene.  Once  she  is  di- 
rectly compared  to  "  a  mother."    How  mother-like 


114  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

she  broods  over  Odysseus  in  all  his  misfortunes 
as  if  he  were  her  own  child  I  And  she  acts  the 
same  part  in  her  relations  with  Telemachus  and 
Penelope.  AH  through  the  poem  she  is  always 
the  same  sweet,  gracious,  dearly  loving,  seK-for- 
getting  woman,  playing  the  mother's  part,  how 
well !  I  cannot  help  regarding  this  conception  of 
mediatorship  in  its  feminine  form  as  the  highest 
touch  of  rehgious  faith  and  feeling,  even  in  the 
Odyssey  itself.  There  is  but  one  other  figure  in 
religious  history  or  literature  that  can  compare 
with  it,  that  of  Mary  the 'mother  of  Jesus.  And 
is  it  not  remarkable  that  both  Athene  and  Mary 
should  have  received,  as  a  unique  cognomen,  the 
same  term  "  irapOevo^  "  or  virgin.  Athene  was  the 
virgin  queen,  as  Mary  became  the  virgin  mother. 
And,  from  this  point  of  view,  is  it  any  wonder 
that  Mary  the  mother  of  Jesus,  in  after  times 
when  her  son  had  been  elevated  in  the  faith  of 
his  followers  to  a  divine  rank,  should  have  been 
transfigured  into  a  hallowed  virginity,  and  even 
raised  to  that  place  of  mediatorship  and  interces- 
sory power  and  grace  which  her  son  had  once  held  ? 
How  natural,  from  a  human  point  of  view,  it  was 
that  as  the  masculine  element  of  mediation  in  the 
second  Person  of  the  trinitarian  dogma  was  more 
and  more  confounded  with  that  of  absolute  and  su- 
preme deity,  the  feminine  element  should  be  pushed 
forward  in  the  person  of  Mary  the  virgin  mother 
until  finally  she  has  become  to  all  Catholic  hearts 
the  real  mediator  between  man  and  God,  and  the 


THE  GREEK  HOMERIC  TRINITY  115 

immediate  object  of  intercessory  prayer.  Nay,  the 
wonder  ceases  that  in  the  old  historic  Catholic 
Church,  represented  to-day  in  the  Roman  Com- 
munion, the  mother  of  Jesus  is  being  recognized 
as  true  queen  of  heaven,  enthroned  by  the  side  of 
Christ  himself,  and  that  already  Catholic  theolo- 
gians are  seeking  to  add  a  fourth  person  to  the 
divine  trinity .  In  that  new  dogma,  Goethe's  "  eter- 
nal womanly,"  imaged  in  far  off  ancient  times  in 
the  Homeric  Athene,  will  have  found  its  true 
place  to  all  Catholic  souls.  Nor  can  the  question 
be  avoided  what  the  Protestant  position  must  be. 
If  a  divine  mediation  through  a  masculine  human 
incarnation  be  accepted  as  a  revealed  truth,  why 
not  also  a  feminine  incarnation  as  well?  Does 
not  the  one  suggest  and  logically  include  the 
other?  Certainly  all  true  moral  mediation  in 
human  experience  has  a  double  form,  based  on  the 
duality  that  exists  in  human  nature.  Fatherhood 
and  brotherhood  are  not  enough.  Motherhood 
and  sisterhood  must  be  added  to  complete  the  ties 
which  bind  all  human  society.  Must  not  the 
same  be  true  of  the  highest  form  of  moral  in- 
fluence and  union,  namely,  that  between  man  and 
God.  Why,  then,  should  not  a  divine  mediator- 
ship  appear  in  fashion  as  a  woman  as  weU  as  "  in 
fashion  like  a  man  ?  "  As  a  matter  of  fact  the 
dogmas  of  the  divine  Christ  and  the  divinized 
Mary  sprang  from  the  same  historical  source  and 
rest  on  the  same  fundamental  moral  grounds. 
Protestants  have  long  since  laid  aside  the  dogma 


116  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

of  Mary,  as  it  was  developed  in  Christian  tradi- 
tion, and  classed  it  among  the  superstitions  of  the 
dark  ages ;  but  they  do  not  all  see  that  the  same 
historical  process  which  overthrows  the  faith  in 
Mary  as  the  virgin  mother  and  queen  of  heaven 
must  overthrow  the  kindred  dogma  of  Christ's 
deity. 

Before  leaving  the  Greek  mythological  trinita- 
rianism  and  passing  to  the  development  of  the  trin- 
itarianism  of  the  Greek  philosophy,  some  space 
should  be  devoted  to  what  may  be  fitly  called  an 
appendix  to  the  Greek  mythological  chapter, 
namely,  some  account  of  the  trinitarian  elements 
in  the  Eoman  religion.  A  common  Aryan  back- 
ground lies  behind  the  historical  accounts  of  both 
Greek  and  Eoman  religious  ideas,  and  there  are 
some  plain  indications  of  a  direct  influence  exer- 
cised by  Hellenism  upon  that  remarkable  prehis- 
toric chapter  of  Etruscan  civilization,  both  in  art 
and  in  religion,  which  in  its  turn  seems  to  have 
had  much  to  do  in  the  moulding  of  the  primitive 
Roman  forms  of  religious  faith.  In  later  historic 
times,  when  Eome  had  extended  her  dominion 
over  the  Greek  world,  and  had  deeply  imbibed  the 
Greek  culture,  there  resulted  an  amalgamation  of 
the  Eoman  and  Greek  mythology  and  polytheism, 
so  that  there  was  a  heterogeneous  fusion  of  Latin 
and  Hellenic  divinities  both  in  character  and  in 
name,  and  the  term  Graeco-Eoman  properly  cov- 
ered the  whole  religious  as  well  as  political  field. 
But  while  all  this  is  true,  it  is  equally  true,  and  to 


THE  GREEK  HOMERIC  TRINITY  117 

be  distinctly  and  carefuUy  noted,  that  the  Roman 
religion  as  it  first  appears  in  history  was  a  com- 
pletely original  and  indigenous  evolution  out  of 
Italian  soil.  This  religion  was  as  characteristically 
polytheistic  as  the  Greek,  but  more  abstract  and 
less  the  result  of  the  poetical  imagination.  Ro- 
man mythology  had  no  Homer  or  even  Hesiod  to 
record  in  imperishable  verse  its  religious  flights  of 
fancy.  Such  genius  was  clearly  wanting  to  the 
Roman  character.  So  complete  was  its  polytheis- 
tic tendency  that,  as  Mommsen  weU  says :  "  The 
number  of  gods  became  as  great  as  the  incidents 
of  earthly  life."  The  Roman  was  practical  rather 
than  idealistic,  and  his  religion  became  "  shriveled 
into  a  dreary  round  of  ceremonies."  It  is  not 
surprising,  then,  that  in  place  of  a  Hesiodic  Theo- 
gony,  or  a  Homeric  Epic,  we  should  have  a  Roman 
Calendar,  with  its  meagre  record  of  sacred  and 
secular  days  and  their  accompanying  festivals,  as 
our  chief  historical  guide  to  a  closer  acquaintance 
with  the  Roman  religion.  But  as  we  study  this 
calendar  and  its  history  concerning  the  chief  reli- 
gious festivals  that  filled  the  Roman  year,  while 
the  completely  and  widely  polytheistic  character 
of  Roman  religious  faith  is  vividly  brought  out, 
another  fact  emerges  with  equal  prominence, 
namely,  that  at  the  official  head  of  the  whole  poly- 
theistic pantheon  there  was  a  triad  of  gods, 
Jupiter,  Jimo,  and  Minerva,  to  whom  a  special 
worship  was  accorded.  In  fact,  the  whole  Roman 
religious  faith  and  cult  was  centred  in  one  spot, 


118  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

with  its  temple  and  ritual,  and  in  one  great  day 
and  rite.  That  spot  was  the  Capitoline  Hill,  on 
which  was  built  the  three-celled  temple,  with  its 
three  altars  and  images  of  Jupiter  CapitoHnus, 
Juno,  and  Minerva.  These  three  divinities  "  con- 
stituted the  official  triad  of  the  Roman  religion." 
They  were  by  eminence  the  "  Dii  populi  Romani." 
Special  "  prayers  were  addressed  to  them  for  the 
public  prosperity."  Especially  on  one  great  festi- 
val day,  —  the  "  Dies  natalis  templi  Capitolini," 
or  "  Lectisternium,"  as  it  was  popularly  called, 
from  the  most  striking  scene  in  the  pageant,  —  the 
images  of  the  three  Capitoline  divinities  were 
brought  out  of  their  several  cells,  placed  on 
couches  and  carried  about  the  city,  and  then 
feasted  together.  The  origin  of  this  unique  reli- 
gious custom  and  of  the  trinitarian  feature  which 
chiefly  distinguishes  it  is  obscure.  Scholars  trace 
its  source  to  the  Etruscan  kings,  who  brought  to 
Rome  their  own  religious  ideas  and  worship  as 
well  as  civilization.  The  architectural  division  of 
the  Capitoline  temple  into  three  parts,  with  three 
special  cells,  seems  to  be  Etruscan.  A  curious 
passage  in  Servius,  a  commentator  on  Virgil  of  the 
fourth  century,  supports  this  conjecture :  "  Those 
wise  in  the  Etruscan  discipline  say  that  among  the 
Etruscan  builders  cities  were  not  considered  as 
truly  complete  in  which  three  gates  were  not  dedi- 
cated, and  also  as  many  temples  of  Jupiter,  Juno, 
and  Minerva."  Fergusson,  in  his  "  History  of  Ar- 
chitecture "  (i.  282),  gives  a  plan  of  an  Etruscan 


THE  GREEK  HOMERIC  TRINITY  119 

temple  which  is  divided  into  three  parts,  a  central 
nave  and  two  aisles,  with  three  corresponding 
doors,  and  three  ceUs  for  the  divinities.  There  is 
no  doubt  a  direct  historical  connection  between  the 
Roman  basilica  of  Imperial  times,  with  its  three- 
fold division,  and  the  Etruscan  temple,  as  there 
plainly  is  between  the  Roman  basilica  and  the 
early  Christian  church,  with  its  final  development 
into  the  Gothic  cathedral.  It  is  indeed  a  curious 
and  noteworthy  inference  which  appears  inevi- 
table, if  these  premises  are  well  founded,  namely, 
that  the  trinitarian  idea  reaUy  lies  behind  that 
threefold  principle  of  division  which  has  been  the 
ruling  feature  of  Graeco-Etruscan,  Roman,  and 
Christian  religious  architecture  from  prehistoric 
times  to  the  present  day.  A  side  view  is  thus 
opened  of  peculiar  significance  into  that  tendency 
of  the  primitive  Aryan  man  to  recognize  a  trini- 
tarian character  in  all  things,  and  to  give  it  ex- 
pression in  public  and  sacred  buildings.  It  is  quite 
well  established  that  the  Roman  Capitoline  trinity 
was  of  Etruscan  origin,  and  that  the  Etruscan  reli- 
gious and  artistic  ideas  were  derived  from  Greece. 
This  explains  the  correspondence  of  the  Capito- 
line trinity  —  Jupiter,  Juno,  and  Minerva  —  with 
the  Homeric  trinity  of  Zeus,  Here,  and  Athene ; 
for  Jupiter  is  the  equivalent  of  Zeus  Pater  or 
Father  Zeus,  while  Juno,  though  in  name  merely  a 
feminine  counterpart  of  Jupiter,  —  being  origi- 
nally Jovina,  the  feminine  of  Jove  —  represents 
in  character  and  function  the  Greek  Here,  and 


120  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

Minerva  is  a  Latinized  Athene,  the  goddess  of  wis- 
dom. In  Virgil  the  Capitoline  triad  has  become 
more  fully  identified  with  the  Greek,  Juno  has  be- 
come the  sister-wife  of  Jupiter,  as  was  Here  that  of 
Zeus,  and  Minerva  has  taken  on  more  completely 
the  various  attributes  of  Athene,  as  inventress  of 
the  arts  and  as  the  friend  of  mankind.  It  is  a 
question,  however,  whether  in  the  original  Italian 
religion  these  divinities  corresponded  so  closely  to 
their  later  Greek  counterparts,  or  had  such  fuUy 
developed  personal  qualities.  But  such  a  question 
need  not  concern  us  here.  This  at  least  is  true, 
that  very  early  in  Roman  history,  and  long  before 
Greece  directly  influenced  Rome,  the  Capitoline 
triad  and  its  cult  was  f uUy  established  on  that  hill 
which  became  the  hearthstone  and  religious  centre 
of  the  Roman  commonwealth,  and  remained  ever 
after  the  point  around  which  the  whole  religious 
system  of  Roman  rites  and  festivals  revolved. 
After  the  political  union  of  Rome  and  Greece  was 
consummated  in  the  second  century  b.  c,  the 
amalgamation  of  the  two  religions  went  on  apace. 
Still,  it  was  never  quite  complete. 

Virgil  well  represents  the  Roman  religion  at 
the  beginning  of  the  empire.  Jupiter,  Juno,  and 
Minerva  in  the  ^neid  are  everywhere  recognized 
as  the  Latin  equivalents  of  Zeus,  Here,  and  Athene. 
Yet  there  are  marked  differences  of  character, 
showing  that  the  old  Latin  ideas  persistently  held 
their  ground.  The  Jupiter  of  Virgil  is  more  just, 
perhaps,  than  the  Zeus  of  Homer,  but  he  lacks  the 


THE  GREEK  HOMERIC  TRINITY 


121 


humanness  of  Zeus  which  brings  him  so  much 
nearer  to  human  hearts.  This  is  especially  true  of 
Minerva  as  compared  with  Athene.  In  the  ^neid 
she  is  a  wise  counselor  and  helper  of  men,  but  she 
somehow  lacks  that  gracious  and  tender  bearing 
which  makes  the  Athene  of  Homer  so  lovable  in 
the  eyes  of  all  whom  she  approaches  to  succor  and 
save.  The  ^neid  represents  a  higher  conception 
of  moral  law  and  its  predestined  consequences,  — 
Jupiter  himself  being  under  its  fatal  power,  —  but 
the  larger  moral  freedom  of  the  Greek  Homeric 
theology  elevates  it  to  a  plane  of  moral  activity  and 
responsibility  that  certainly  more  than  compensates 
for  its  allowance  of  aberrations  from  the  stricter 
fatalism  of  the  Virgilian  dogma.  In  the  introduc- 
tion to  the  translation  of  the  ^neid  by  Messrs. 
Lonsdale  and  Lee  a  statement  is  made  with  which 
I  quite  agree :  "  The  author  of  the  '  Christian 
Year '  has  said  that,  next  to  Sophocles,  Virgil  is 
the  most  religious  of  the  poets  of  heathenism.  The 
word  religious  is  ambiguous,  and  it  would  be  diffi- 
cult to  agree  with  this  opinion,  if  the  word  reli- 
gious is  taken  in  its  usual  sense.  But  if  by  religion 
is  meant  a  belief  in  fate,  then  it  is  quite  true  that 
the  ^neid  is  the  epic  of  destiny.  We  might  take 
as  a  motto  for  it  Virgil's  own  line  thus  rendered 
by  Dryden :  — 

*  But  ah,  what  use  of  valor  can  be  made, 
When  heaven's  propitious  powers  refuse  their  aid  ? ' 

No  Stoic  dissertation  can  set  forth  the  power  of  fate 
more  determinately."     But  if  the  ^ueid  is  "  the 


122  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

epic  of  destiny,"  quite  as  truly  is  the  Odyssey  the 
epic  of  moral  freedom.  Virgil  was  a  true  poet  of 
the  Augustan  era,  with  aU  its  splendid  civilization 
and  culture.  His  great  poem  is  its  noblest  epitaph. 
But  Virgil  was  a  child  of  his  age.  The  Eoman 
world  of  his  day  had  lost  the  simple  faith  of  youth, 
and  had  fallen  into  that  state  of  cold  doubt  and 
skepticism  which  may  be  seen  in  its  best  form  in 
the  writings  of  Cicero.  The  last  religious  refuge 
of  such  an  age  is  the  doctrine  of  fate.  It  was  out 
of  such  a  fatalistic  reaction  that  the  Stoic  panthe- 
istic philosophy  arose,  with  its  lofty  but  cheerless 
ethics  of  unconditional  resignation.  Virgil  had 
been  educated  under  Epicurean  influences,  but  in 
later  life  his  religious  sympathies  tended  toward 
the  conservative  reaction  set  on  foot  by  Augustus. 
His  epic  poem  is  an  effort  to  reinstate  the  ancient 
religion  among  the  "  doubting  Pilates  "  of  his  day. 
In  a  sense  the  effort  was  a  splendid  success.  He 
painted  the  mythological  polytheism  of  early  Italy, 
in  its  later  HeUenized  form,  in  colors  whose  bright- 
ness and  richness  time  cannot  dim.  But  after  aU 
they  were  the  colors  of  the  sunset,  and  the  ^neid 
wiU  ever  remain  the  pathetic  vision  of  a  dying 
faith.  To  attempt  to  compare  such  a  poem  with 
the  Odyssey  is  reaUy  unjust  to  both.  They  belong 
to  two  utterly  different  spheres  of  religious  thought. 
The  pessimistic  and  melancholy  temper  of  the 
Augustan  age  is  reflected  in  Virgil  himseK  and  in 
his  profoundly  sad  verse.  A  sympathetic  critic 
speaks  of  "his  majestic  sadness,  his  grace  and  pity." 


THE  GREEK  HOMERIC  TRINITY  123 

Such  in  truth  is  the  impression  which  the  JEneid 
leaves  on  the  reader.  From  beginning  to  end  it 
is  bathed  with  the  sober  hues  of  a  fatalism  that 
broods  darkling  over  aU  skies.  The  joyous  spring- 
time of  the  Homeric  world,  with  its  evergreen  isles 
and  bright  many-voiced  waves  of  ocean,  has"  gone 
forever,  and  in  its  place  are  the  melancholy  autum- 
nal days  of  an  age  that  is  disillusioned  and  waits 
hopelessly  for  what  may  come.  If  the  Odyssey  is 
the  Bhagavat-Gita  or  "  Divine  Song  "  of  the  Eth- 
nic Bible,  the  ^neid  is  its  Book  of  Ecclesiastes. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  EVOLUTION   OF  THE    GREEK  PHILOSOPHIC AL 
TRINITARIANISM 

The  Greek  mythological  age  may  be  said  to 
have  ended  with  the  Persian  wars  at  the  beginning 
of  the  fifth  century  B.  c.  These  wars  were  fol- 
lowed by  a  rapid  upward  movement  of  Greek  civil- 
ization which  quickly  culminated  in  its  famous 
golden  age,  producing  the  most  wonderful  out- 
burst of  social,  literary,  artistic,  and  religious  de- 
velopment that  the  world  had  yet  seen.  It  was 
the  age  of  Herodotus,  ^schylus,  Sophocles,  So- 
crates, Pericles,  Thucydides,  Xenophon,  Phidias, 
and  Polygnotus.  What  makes  it  especially  note- 
worthy for  us  in  our  present  study  is  the  fact  that 
it  prepared  the  way  for  that  remarkable  evolution 
of  metaphysical  thought  which  resulted  in  the  philo- 
sophical idealism  of  Plato  and  Aristotle.  It  was 
by  these  great  thinkers,  who  borrowed  their  inspi- 
ration from  Socrates,  that  the  educated  Greek 
world  was  carried  over  from  the  old  mythological 
and  polytheistic  conception  of  divinity  to  that  new 
ground  of  philosophical  theism  which  became  the 
foundation  of  all  later  theologies.  A  single  para- 
graph from  Plato's  Timaeus  (40  Steph.),  in  which 
with  the  most  exquisite  irony  he  politely  bows  out 


GKEEK  PHILOSOPHICAL  TRINITARIANISM    125 

of  existence  the  old  polytheistic  gods,  may  be 
truly  said  to  mark  the  epoch-making  transition 
from  that  theory  of  divine  multiplicity  which  had 
hitherto  characterized  more  or  less  completely  aU 
Ethnic  thought,  to  the  new  conception  of  God's 
essential  unity,  which  was  henceforth  to  rule  in 
philosophy.  But  while  Plato  was  a  philosophical 
theist  or  monist,  he  left  a  way  open  for  the  admis- 
sion of  a  multiplicity  of  divine  and  semi-divine  be- 
ings in  the  ideal  sphere  by  his  dualistic  mediational 
doctrines.  Dualism  lay  at  the  basis  of  Plato's 
spiritual  philosophy.  It  was  essential  in  his  view 
to  the  defense  of  all  real  spiritual  existence  that  a 
radical  line  of  division  should  be  drawn  between 
spirit  and  matter.  The  earlier  Greek  philosophers 
from  Thales  to  Anaxagoras  had  built  their  systems 
on  the  assumption  of  an  original  material  monism. 
Heracleitus  indeed  started  out  on  a  reactionary 
dualistic  path,  but  failed  to  foUow  his  own  lead. 
Anaxagoras  took  a  step  further,  declaring  that 
behind  motion  in  the  phenomenal  world  there  must 
be  a  mover,  but  left  his  pregnant  suggestion  with- 
out critical  analysis.  It  was  reserved  for  Socrates 
and  Plato,  his  great  disciple,  to  subject  this  sugges- 
tive hint  of  Anaxagoras  to  critical  dialectic  treat- 
ment, out  of  which  came  the  idealistic  dualism  of 
Plato  and  his  school.  This  doctrine  rests  on  the 
assumption  that  there  is  a  radical  and  eternal  dis- 
tinction in  fact  as  weU  as  in  thought  between  the 
ideal  or  spiritual  sphere  and  the  phenomenal  or 
material.     This  dualistic  view  is  modified  by  an- 


126  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

other  assumption,  namely,  that  the  ideal  world  is 
the  truly  real,  and  is  the  pattern  and  cause  of  aU 
temporal  and  phenomenal  things  ;  so  that  duality 
is  but  a  development  in  time  of  an  original  unity 
above  time.  It  is  noticeable  here  that  the  radical 
line  of  cleavage  is  between  spirit  and  matter,  or 
between  the  eternal  and  the  temporal.  Man,  as  a 
creature  with  a  body,  belongs  to  the  material  and 
temporal.  Hence  he  is  naturally  separated  from 
God  and  the  heavenly  realm.  Now  appears  the 
ground  for  Plato's  mediation  ideas.  How  can  God 
be  brought  into  moral  relation  with  men?  For 
Plato  believes  in  the  divine  personal  goodness  and 
disposition  to  care  for  his  human  creatures.  But 
God  himself  "  cannot  mix  with  men."  Thus  a 
mediative  system  is  needed,  and  such  a  system  of 
mediating  instrumentalities  forms  a  leading  fea- 
ture of  Plato's  philosophy.  This  system  begins  in 
the  very  process  of  creation  itself  by  which  the 
material  world  is  brought  into  being.  In  the 
Timaeus,  which  contains  Plato's  cosmogony,  three 
principles  or  classes  of  natures  are  described :  1. 
Intelligible  or  ideal  being  which  is  uncreated  and 
eternal.  2.  The  generated  imitation  or  copy  of 
ideal  being,  that  is,  phenomena  or  the  created 
world.  3.  Matter,  which  with  Plato  is  without 
positive  qualities,  and  means  simply  space  viewed 
as  the  receptacle  or  "nurse  of  generation."  It  is 
by  the  union  of  the  first  and  third  principles, 
namely,  eternal  ideas  and  infinite  space  or  matter, 
that  the  phenomenal  world  is  generated  or  pro- 


GREEK  PHILOSOPHICAL  TRINITARIANISM     127 

duced.  How  can  this  be  done  ?  Here  the  neces- 
sity of  the  mediating  element  is  seen.  This  prin- 
ciple of  mediation  on  which  all  creation  depends  is 
called  by  Plato  soul  (t/^x^).  Soid  is  itself  a  pre- 
liminary creation  of  God,  which  Plato  conceives  as 
a  sort  of  mixture  of  idea  and  space,  or  rather  per- 
haps an  emanation  from  the  divine  mind  (vovi) 
which  under  spatial  or  material  conditions  becomes 
personalized  into  a  mediating  being  who  thus  is 
made  the  agent  in  the  production  of  the  world. 
This  curious  piece  of  pure  speculation  shows  to 
what  shifts  Plato  was  driven  by  his  dualistic 
theory.  Mediation  is  its  necessary  corollary,  and 
this  principle  of  union  and  communication  between 
the  upper  and  lower  worlds  is  steadily  employed 
throughout  his  metaphysical  writings.  He  has  a 
system  of  demonology  which  forms  a  sort  of  medi- 
ating bridge  between  heaven  and  earth.  These 
demons,  or  good  angels,  are  the  bearers  of  com- 
munications from  one  side  to  the  other.  Through 
them  prayers  are  carried  up  to  God,  and  divine 
responses  are  given  to  men.  Even  nature  is  in- 
troduced into  this  mediating  system.  Hence  5uch 
oracles  as  that  at  Delphi,  where  priestesses  were 
inspired  by  vapors  issuing  from  a  cave,  Plato's 
doctrine  of  divine  inspiration,  in  which  he  seems  to 
have  implicitly  believed,  was  founded  upon  the 
mediative  principle.  Here,  then,  in  the  very  nature 
of  the  Platonic  philosophy,  a  foundation  was  laid 
for  a  trinitarian  development.  In  fact,  no  such 
development  was  clearly  visible  in  Plato  himself. 


128  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

The  signs  of  it  which  some  Christian  writers,  like 
Cudworth,  have  found,  belong  to  dialogues  that 
are  now  known  to  be  spurious.  But  a  germ  lay 
concealed  there  which  later  Platonists  were  sure 
to  bring  to  light.  Plato  was  no  trinitarian  in  the 
fuU  sense  of  the  word  ;  he  had  no  trinity  of  gods ; 
he  was  a  strict  monotheist.  But  his  mediation 
theory,  so  fundamental  in  his  dualism,  was  a  direct 
pointer,  as  we  have  seen  so  often  in  other  Ethnic 
religions,  to  a  trinitarian  result.  Out  of  it  came 
at  last  the  famous  logos  (Xoyos)  doctrine  which  has 
played  so  prominent  a  part  in  Christian  theology. 
I  have  already  briefly  discussed  this  logos  doctrine 
in  its  rise  and  evolution  in  pre-Christian  thought, 
in  my  previous  volume  on  the  "  Evolution  of  Trin- 
itarianism ;  "  but  it  is  now  necessary  that  it  should 
receive  a  more  extended  treatment,  in  order  that 
one  may  f  uUy  understand  the  historical  background 
of  the  later  New  Platonic  trinity  of  which  Plotinus 
was  the  great  expounder.  The  term  Xoyos  was 
ordinarily  employed  in  classic  Greek  in  the  sense 
of  reason  or  the  faculty  of  intelligence,  and  also 
for  the  expression  of  reason  and  thought  in  lan- 
guage, namely,  word  or  speech.  The  first  is  its 
constant  meaning  in  Greek  philosophy,  and  such 
is  its  significance  in  the  logos  doctrine.  It  was  an 
unfortunate  error  in  the  Vulgate  Latin  version  of 
the  New  Testament  that  the  Greek  term  Aoyo?  in 
the  proem  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  which  was  plainly 
used  in  its  philosophical  sense,  and  should  have 
been  translated  by  the  Latin  equivalent  ratio,  was 


GREEK  PHILOSOPHICAL  TRINITARIANISM    129 

translated  by  the  term  verhum,  whicli  fails  wholly 
to  give  its  real  meaning.  This  blunder  was  per- 
petuated in  the  King  James  English  version,  and 
a  strange  spirit  of  reverence  has  led  recent  scholars 
to  adhere  to  this  error  in  the  new  revised  version. 
The  true  translation  is:  "In  the  beginning  was 
the  reason  or  intelligence  of  God."  Such  was  its 
meaning  as  used  by  Plato,  and  by  Greek  philoso- 
phers before  and  after  him.  With  this  meaning 
it  came  to  be  employed  for  such  forms  or  fruits  of 
intelligence  as  law,  order,  especially  the  divine  law 
or  order  of  things.  Such  was  its  use  by  Heraclei- 
tus,  who  may  be  said  to  have  introduced  the  word 
into  philosophical  language.  Whether  Heracleitus 
ever  gave  to  Aoyos  a  personal  meaning  is  not  clear. 
My  own  impression  is  against  it.  Heracleitus 
scarcely  rose  to  any  full  philosophical  conception 
of  a  personal  God,  or  of  a  reason  of  God.  By 
reason  (Ao'yos)  he  meant  the  principle  of  eternal 
order  and  law  which  he  found  behind  all  the 
changes  and  movements  of  the  material  world. 
Even  Plato's  use  of  it  is  not  personal  as  a  rule ; 
it  is  only  an  attribute  of  personality.  His  more 
usual  term  for  the  divine  intelligence  is  vovs  (mind), 
which  he  sometimes  substitutes  for  Oeoq  (God), 
since  the  divine  intelligence  is  the  essential  interior 
principle  of  the  Divine  Being.  Plato,  however, 
frequently  used  the  term  Xoyos  (reason)  as  the 
equivalent  of  vov^  (mind).  In  the  later  Platonic 
school  the  two  terms  came  to  be  used  synonymously, 
and  finally  the  three  terms,  ^€os,  voOs,  Xdyos,  were 


130  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

aU  employed  to  mean  the  Divine  Being  in  Ms  es- 
sential eternal  character.  The  term  in  Plato  for 
the  mediating  principle  is  never  voOs  or  Aoyos,  but 
ilrvxn,  namely,  the  world  soul,  which  became  the 
author  of  aU  other  individual  souls  and  mediated 
between  them  and  God.  A  sort  of  semblance  of 
trinity  might  be  suggested  as  existing  in  Plato,  in 
his  use  of  ^€os,  vors,  and  ifrvxn  ;  but  what  has  been 
said  shows  that  Plato  had  no  such  idea  in  his 
mind.  He  made  no  personal  distinction  between 
^€os,  voOs,  and  A.oyo9,  and  his  world  soul  Qlrvxv)  was 
not  an  eternal  divine  being,  but  a  created  mediat- 
ing being  whom  God  made  to  be  the  connecting  link 
between  himseK  and  created  things,  or,  in  more  phi- 
losophical language,  between  idea  and  phenomena. 
How,  then,  came  the  logos  doctrine  of  later 
Greek  philosophy  with  its  trinitarian  appendix  to 
be  traced  to  Plato  ?  The  answer  to  this  must  be 
found  in  one  of  those  common  evolutions  of  lan- 
guage by  which  words  gather  new  meanings  and 
even  change  places  with  other  words,  —  a  lin- 
guistic process  due  attention  to  which  would  have 
saved  Christian  theologians  from  not  a  few  mis- 
takes. The  evolution  began  in  the  gradual  substi- 
tution of  Xoyos  for  vovs  as  the  divine  reason  or 
intelligence.  This  change  appears  prominently  in 
Philo,  —  the  famous  Jew  of  Alexandria,  —  and 
also  in  the  early  Christian  Alexandrian  philoso- 
phers, especiaQy  the  Gnostics ;  and  through  such 
channels  it  went  into  Christian  theology.  It  is  in 
this  form  that  it  appears  in  the  Fourth  Gospel. 


GREEK  PHILOSOPHICAL  TRINITARIANISM    131 

Along  with  this  hnguistic  evolution  went  another, 
namely,  the  substitution  of  \6yos  for  if/vxy,  as  the 
great  Platonic  principle  of  mediation.  Aoyos,  as 
has  been  said,  was  never  used  by  Plato  to  repre- 
sent the  mediation  element,  "^vxrj  was  his  philo- 
sophical word  always  for  such  mediation.  In  his 
more  popular  dialogues  he  sometimes  substitutes 
such  terms  as  Sat/xwv  or  epo?,  but  these  personificar 
tions  are  drawn  from  the  mythological  vocabulary 
of  his  age.  Here,  again,  Philo  is  the  principal 
medium  of  evolution  between  Plato  and  later  times. 
Philo  substituted  Xoyos  for  xlruxrj  as  the  central 
principle  of  mediation  between  God,  the  transcen- 
dent ineffable  One,  and  his  creatures.  In  fact,  the 
kayo's  of  Philo  is  the  strict  counterpart,  on  the 
mediational  side,  of  the  ifruxn  of  Plato.  On  an- 
other side  a  clear  difference  is  to  be  observed,  but 
this  difference  is  to  be  explained  by  the  fact  that 
Philo  has  left  the  strict  theistic  position  of  Plato 
and  anticipates  the  monistic  evolution  which  will 
culminate  in  the  pantheism  of  Plotinus.  It  can 
now  be  easily  seen  how  the  Aoyos  mediation  doc- 
trine can  be  traced  through  the  evolution  of  the 
Platonic  dualistic  philosophy  back  to  Plato  him- 
self, although  he  did  not  use  the  term  Aoyos,  but 
ilruxv^  for  his  mediating  principle.  On  the  whole, 
it  may  be  said  that  Philo  is  the  historical  founder 
of  the  Aoyos  theology.  He  placed  the  Aoyos  as  the 
great  principle  of  divine  mediation  in  the  forefront 
of  his  philosophical  system,  and  introduced  the 
word  /xco-mys  (mediator)  into  theological  language. 


132  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

To  the  Philonic  school  Paul  plainly  owed  his  own 
use  of  this  term,  which  became  the  keynote  of  his 
mediating  system.  The  same  is  true  of  the  un- 
known author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  The 
remarkable  proem  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  ceases  to 
be  so  remarkable  when  its  historical  source  is  thus 
discovered.  How  the  dogma  afterwards  took  shape 
in  Christian  theological  thought  and  finally  re- 
sulted in  the  complete  trinitarianism  of  the  Nicene 
Creed  my  previous  book  unfolds.  The  very  cen- 
tre and  heart  of  that  creed  is  its  A.oyos  mediation 
doctrine,  and  history  shows  that  this  doctrine  has 
its  source  in,  and  is  directly  evolved  out  of,  the 
Platonic  philosophy. 

But  even  in  Philo  we  have  not  yet  reached  a 
philosophical  trinity.  Philo  is  religiously  a  true 
Jew,  and  still  holds  to  one  personal  God.  Yet 
his  Xoyo^  as  mediator  (fiea-Lrrjs)  has  already  assumed 
a  prominence  that  threatens  to  make  God  abdicate 
his  old  throne  as  the  direct  Father  and  Savior  of 
his  chosen  people.  The  Aoyos  has  become  the  mes- 
senger, the  high  priest,  "  the  man  from  heaven," 
the  "  first  begotten  son,"  the  medium  of  prayer 
and  offering,  the  friend  of  man.  No  such  doctrine 
is  to  be  found  in  the  Old  Testament.  There  God 
himself  directly  approaches  men  and  deals  with 
them  as  their  own  heavenly  Father  and  Redeemer. 
Whence,  then,  did  Philo,  true  Jew  as  he  was, 
gather  his  mediation  ideas  and  foist  them  into  his 
interpretation  of  the  Old  Testament  writings  ? 
The  answer  has  been  already  given.     A  Jew  in 


GREEK  PHILOSOPHICAL  TRINITARIANISM    133 

religious  faith,  Philo  was  educated  in  Greek 
schools,  where  he  had  drunk  deeply  of  the  Platonic 
philosophy.  But  if  no  trinity  yet  emerges  in  Philo, 
two  things  only  are  wanting  to  bring  about  such  a 
result.  1.  That  his  "  reason  "  (Xoyos)  or  "  media- 
tor "  (fieo-tTiys)  should  become  a  strict  person ;  and 
2.  that  a  third  being  should  be  added.  As  to  the 
first  point,  already  in  Philo  himself  there  is  a  re- 
markable wavering  between  a  personal  and  imper- 
sonal "  reason,"  so  that  there  is  great  diversity  of 
opinion  among  scholars  as  to  which  view  should  be 
taken.  To  me  this  question  has  no  special  interest. 
Philo's  half-personal,  half -impersonal  use  of  "  rea- 
son" (Xoyos)  is  simply  an  evidence  of  the  wavering 
and  hesitancy  that  appears  throughout  his  writ- 
ings, indicating  the  half-unconscious  drift  of  his 
thought  from  theism  to  pantheism,  or  from  the 
personal  to  the  impersonal  view  of  divinity.  But 
so  strongly  personal  at  times  is  his  language  in  re- 
ference to  the  mediator  that  Christian  writers  such 
as  Paul,  the  writer  to  the  Hebrews,  the  author  of 
the  Fourth  Gospel,  Origen  and  his  school,  were 
easily  led  to  regard  it  as  denoting  a  personal  medi- 
ating being.  Thus  the  foundation  is  already  laid 
in  the  Platonic  Philo  for  a  second  person  in  the 
Godhead,  and  when  later  the  doctrine  of  a  third 
person,  the  Holy  Spirit,  began  to  grow  in  the 
Christian  church,  it  was  not  difficult  to  find  the 
germs  of  it  in  Philo  himself  as  weU  as  in  the  Old 
Testament. 

If  Philo  was  in  a  sense  the  founder  of  the  Xoyos 


134  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

"doctrine,  which  by  a  curious  fate  became  trans- 
planted into  Christian  theology,  and  paved  the 
way  for  the  Christian  trinity,  it  was  Plutarch  who 
more  truly  formed  the  historical  bridge  between 
the  older  and  newer  Platonism,  and  prepares  us 
for  the  final  evolution  which  will  give  us  the  full- 
fledged  New  Platonic  trinity  of  Plotinus. 

With  Plutarch  we  reenter  the  direct  line  of 
evolution  of  Platonism,  —  Philo  representing  a 
side  line  which  has  become  famous  because  of  its 
unique  influence  upon  Christianity.  Before  di- 
rectly taking  up  this  last  chapter  of  the  Greek 
philosophical  trinity,  it  will  be  well  to  notice  its 
peculiar  character  in  general,  which  consists  in  the 
fact  that  it  rests  entirely  on  a  speculative  basis, 
and  allows  no  strictly  mythological  element  to 
enter  in  to  qualify  or  corrupt  it.  As  we  have  al- 
ready seen,  Plato  eliminated  from  his  metaphysical 
scheme  all  fabulous  materials.  He  sometimes 
illustrated  his  doctrines  by  myths  and  polytheistic 
traditions,  but  these  were  mostly  a  mere  literary 
garniture ;  and  if  he  seemed  to  accept  them  as  con- 
taining something  of  truth,  he  held  them  loosely 
as  remaining  shreds  of  his  traditional  faith,  not  as 
constituent  elements  of  his  metaphysical  specula- 
tions. This  character  which  was  given  to  Plato- 
nism at  the  start  was  preserved  to  the  end.  It  is 
owing  to  this  cardinal  fact  that  the  later  Greek 
philosophical  trinity  as  finally  set  forth  by  Plo- 
tinus will  be  the  most  logically  consistent  and 
completely  speculative  piece  of  metaphysical  con- 


GREEK  PHILOSOPHICAL  TRINITARIANISM    135 

struction  that  has  ever  appeared  in  the  world. 
When  it  is  compared  with  the  two  other  Aryan 
trinities,  the  difference  from  this  point  of  view  wiH 
be  readily  seen.  Zoroastrianism  from  beginning  to 
end  is  full  of  mythological  elements.  It  is  hardly 
known  whether  Zoroaster  himself  was  a  historical 
or  a  mythical  character.  Sosiosh,  the  Zoroastrian 
"  savior,"  was  a  complete  myth,  and  Mithra,  the 
"  mediator,"  was  originally  a  mythological  divinity 
of  the  prehistoric  polytheism.  The  only  philoso- 
phical rival  of  the  Plotinian  trinity  is  the  Hindoo 
TrimurtL  But  though  this  trinity  becomes  as 
plainly  metaphysical  and  pantheistic  as  that  of 
Plotinus  himseK,  its  whole  historical  basis  is  laid 
in  the  earlier  mythology,  and  the  very  names  of 
its  triune  members  are  those  of  mythological  gods 
who  had  done  duty  in  the  earlier  polytheistic  cult. 
But  this  fact  wiU  find  its  best  illustration  in  the 
analysis  I  shall  give  of  the  Plotinian  trinity ;  and 
I  refer  to  it  now  that  it  may  be  kept  clearly  in 
view  as  we  pass  on  to  trace  the  historical  evolution 
which  culminated  in  Plotinus. 

Plutarch  lived  in  the  first  century  of  the  Chris- 
tian era.  There  is  no  evidence  in  his  writings  of 
any  acquaintance  with  Christianity.  He  called 
himself  a  Platonist,  but  he  represents  the  philoso- 
phic current  of  his  age  which  was  moving  strongly 
towards  a  monistic  view  of  the  world.  This  move- 
ment had  its  chief  philosophical  exponent  in  Stoi- 
cism, and  Plutarch,  while  opposing  the  Stoics  at 
different  points,  shows  how  much  he  was  influenced 


136  THE  ETHNC  TRINITIES 

by  the  pantheistic  atmosphere  around  him.  The 
ruling  feature  of  Plutarch's  Platonism  is  its  medi- 
ation system.  Mediation  is  his  one  solvent  for 
every  philosophical  dilemma.  It  was  this  me- 
diation principle  in  Plato's  dualism  that  made 
Plutarch  a  Platonist.  But  his  treatment  of  this 
principle  is  original  and  peculiar.  Plato  had  in- 
troduced mediating  elements  to  bridge  over  par- 
tially the  great  chasm  that  existed  between  his 
two  orders  of  being,  the  ideal  and  the  phenomenal. 
But  the  chasm  still  remained.  With  Plutarch 
the  real  chasm  no  longer  exists.  The  mediating 
powers  have  completely  filled  it.  Dualism  has  be- 
come monism.  The  new  philosophic  key,  used 
also  by  the  Stoics,  is  evolution.  The  creation  in 
time  of  Plato  has  given  place  to  an  evolution  from 
eternity,  and  this  evolution  has  no  gaps  in  its  pro- 
gress from  the  original  first  principle  of  existence 
to  the  lowest  form  of  matter.  This,  of  course,  is 
what  we  call  New  Platonism,  and  its  path  is 
straight  henceforth  to  its  extreme  result  in  Ploti- 
nus.  Yet  Plotinus,  as  well  as  Plutarch,  called 
himself  a  follower  of  Plato,  because  starting  with 
Plato's  idealism  he,  with  Plutarch,  adopted  to  its 
fullest  extent  the  associated  principle  of  media- 
tion. The  three  test  words  of  New  Platonism,  as 
a  philosophy,  are  idealism,  mediation,  evolution. 
The  first  two  belong  to  Plato  himself,  while 
the  third  is  the  new  note  which  changed  Platonism 
into  New  Platonism.  This  change  was  radical; 
for  the  new  evolution  principle  led  to  a  magnify- 


GREEK  PHILOSOPHICAL  TRINITARIANISM    137 

ing  of  the  mediation  principle,  which  metamor- 
phosed the  dualism  that  Hes  at  the  foundation  of 
theism  to  a  monism  which  is  the  direct  road  to 
pantheism.  How  far  Plutarch  was  aware  of  this 
profound  change  one  cannot  tell.  He  gives  no 
sign.  But  his  work  entitled  "  Isis  and  Osiris  "  ^ 
is  interesting  as  showing  how  ready  he  was  to  ac- 
cept a  trinity,  such  as  he  found  in  the  Egyptian 
religion  of  his  day,  from  the  standpoint  of  the 
Platonic  dualism.  The  "  Isis  and  Osiris  "  gives 
evidence  that  Plutarch  found  in  Platonism  a  sort 
of  a  trinity.  But  how  ?  one  may  well  ask.  I  can 
conceive  of  but  one  answer,  from  the  philosophic 
point  of  view.  It  was  the  new  evolution  keynote 
that  enabled  Plutarch  to  accept  so  easily  the  idea 
of  a  trinity  of  gods,  thus  forming  a  convenient 
bridge  between  the  original  One^  the  Father  of 
Plato,  and  the  many  mediational  divine  and  semi- 
divine  beings  which  filled  the  chasm  between  the 
two  worlds  of  eternity  and  time.  We  shall  find 
this  very  bridge  employed  by  Plotinus  in  the  re- 
markable chapter  of  the  "  Enneads,"  entitled  "  The 
Three  Hypostases  "  (*0t  rpcts  vTroorao-cts). 

The  "  Isis  and  Osiris  "  of  Plutarch  is  so  curious 
and  suggestive,  as  a  stage  in  the  evolution  of 
Greek  trinitarian  ideas,  that  it  demands  further 
notice.     This  work  is  an  attempt  from  the  media- 

^  I  assume  the  genuineness  of  this  production ;  for,  whether 
genuine  or  not,  it  harmonizes  with  the  general  tone  and  character 
of  Plutarch's  genuine  writings,  and,  if  not  from  the  hand  of 
Plutarch  himself,  must  be  the  work  of  a  disciple. 


138  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

tional  and  eclectic  point  of  view  to  explain  the 
Egyptian  polytheism.  Plutarch  assumed  that  all 
religions  are  essentially  one  in  spirit  and  aim,  and 
that  a  conunon  truth  underlies  all  the  diversified 
forms  of  religious  faith.  This  eclectic  liberalism 
had  its  root  in  the  original  spirit  and  philosophy  of 
Plato,  —  a  spirit  drawn  from  the  inquisitive  and 
critical  method  of  Socrates, — but  it  grew  more 
and  more  into  a  vital  principle  of  judgment  and 
conduct  with  the  evolution  of  Platonism  into  New 
Platonism,  which  sought  to  find  in  philosophy  a 
common  ground  of  agreement  and  harmony  for 
the  divergent  religious  systems  in  the  world.  This 
irenic,  tolerant  element  characterized  the  later 
New  Platonic  writings,  and  is  the  secret  of  their 
undying  charm,  —  a  charm  that  sheds  a  halo 
around  the  writings  of  Plutarch  himself,  and  has 
placed  him  in  the  calendar  of  pre-Christian  saints. 
The  subject-matter  of  the  "  Isis  and  Osiris  "  is 
a  myth  concerning  three  Egyptian  gods  which  had 
become  popular  in  the  later  religion  of  Egypt,  and 
also  among  the  Komans  who  were  inclined  in  Plu- 
tarch's day  to  accept  foreign  cults,  — Egypt  being 
now  a  Roman  province.  As  a  Platonist  Plutarch 
seeks  to  find  the  esoteric  truth  which  this  exoteric 
myth  contains.  The  warp  and  woof  of  the  essay  is 
a  comparison  which  is  instituted  between  the  triple 
myth  of  Osiris,  Isis,  and  Horus,  and  the  three  fun- 
damental principles  of  Platonism.  Thus  the  basis 
is  laid  for  a  philosophical  triad,  which  Plutarch 
discovers  under  the  disguise  of  the  Egyptian  poly- 


GREEK  PHILOSOPHICAL  TRINITARIANISM    139 

theism.  It  is  interesting  to  observe  how  ready- 
Plutarch  is  to  accept  a  trinitarian  view  of  things. 
"  The  better  and  more  divine  nature,"  he  says,  "  is 
made  up  of  three  principles ;  "  "  and  we  may  con- 
jecture that  the  Egyptians  reverence  the  most 
beautiful  kind  of  triangle  (the  right-angled),  be- 
cause they  liken  it  to  the  nature  of  the  universe." 
He  proceeds  to  call  three  the  "  perfect "  number. 
He  suggests  that  in  Hesiod's  Theogony  "  the  first 
^YQ  elements  of  creation "  are  reducible  to  three, 
and  this  recalls  to  him  "  the  fable  of  Plato's  which 
Socrates  has  related  in  the  Symposium,"  in  which 
three  persons.  Wealth,  Poverty,  and  Love,  figure. 
Thus  Plutarch  brings  Hesiod,  Plato,  and  the 
Egyptian  myth  into  philosophical  harmony  by 
means  of  a  trinity  which  he  finds  in  the  very  nature 
of  things,  —  a  passage  which  reminds  one  of  the 
extract  from  Aristotle  previously  quoted,  in  which 
he  describes  a  principle  of  threeness  in  nature,  and 
suggests  that  it  lies  behind  the  trinitarian  rites  in 
the  worship  of  the  gods.  Plutarch  was  thus  pre- 
pared from  his  own  philosophic  background  to  em- 
ploy a  trinitarian  key  in  the  interpretation  of  the 
Egyptian  polytheism.  Such  a  key  is  for  him  the 
best  bridge  from  unity  to  multiplicity  and  vice 
versa;  and  the  same  philosophical  assumptions,  I 
may  here  say,  which  induced  Plutarch  to  build 
such  a  trinitarian  bridge,  lie  behind  aU  the  philoso- 
phical trinities  of  history.  Let  me  now  describe 
this  bridge  as  Plutarch  built  it. 

The  Egyptian  myth  included  a  fourth  god,  Ty- 


140  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

phon,  who  represented  the  evil  principle.  Plu- 
tarch here  applies  the  Platonic  dualism,  and  treats 
the  Egyptian  Typhon  as  equivalent  to  the  Platonic 
principle  of  matter,  which  is  the  spring  of  what- 
ever is  defective  and  evil  in  the  world.  It  is  to  be 
noted,  however,  that  Plutarch  goes  beyond  Plato,  — 
becoming  almost  if  not  quite  a  Zoroastrian.  Plato's 
matter  was  wholly  negative  in  character.  For  him 
there  is  only  one  positive  principle  of  life  and  be- 
ing, namely,  the  good.  But  Plutarch  seems  to 
hold  to  two  eternal  active  principles,  one  good,  the 
other  evil,  and  refers  to  Zoroaster  as  holding  the 
same  view.  In  this  Plutarch  leaves  the  track  of 
his  master.  Probably  the  explanation  is  to  be 
found  in  the  character  of  Typhon,  as  given  in  the 
Egyptian  myth,  which  made  him  an  active  agent 
for  evil.  But  in  explaining  the  rest  of  the  myth 
Plutarch  returns  to  thoroughly  Platonic  ground. 
Osiris,  Isis,  and  Horus  represent  the  trinal  charac- 
ter of  "  the  better  and  more  divine  nature." 
Plutarch  plainly  supposed  himself  to  be  simply 
following  out  Plato's  own  principles,  for  he  speaks 
of  Plato  in  this  connection  as  "  adopting  into  his 
system  chiefly  the  religious  notions  of  the  Egyp- 
tians." Whether  Plato  actually  borrowed  from 
the  Egyptians  or  not,  Plutarch  plainly  thought  so, 
and  accordingly  regarded  his  own  trinitarian  inter- 
pretation of  the  Osiris  myth  as  a  genuine  product 
of  Platonic  principles.  It  is  not  necessary  to  our 
purpose  to  go  at  length  into  Plutarch's  curious 
adaptation  of  the  Platonic  philosophy  to  the  Egyp- 


GREEK  PHILOSOPHICAL  TRINITARIANISM    141 

tian  mythology.  A  simple  statement  of  it  will  be 
enough  to  show  how  far  advanced  already  we  are 
on  the  philosophical  trinitarian  road  towards  the 
complete  New  Platonism  of  Plotinus,  and  that  the 
root  and  seed  of  it  all  is  traceable  to  Plato  him- 
self. 

Plutarch  makes  Osiris  the  superior  principle  of 
good,  the  eternal  reason  or  intelligence  (Xoyos),  the 
fountain  head  of  aU  intelligence  in  aU  things,  and 
the  final  as  well  as  efficient  cause  of  the  world. 
As  such  Osiris  corresponds  to  Plato's  Zeus  or 
Father,  "  idea  of  the  good,"  the  "  intelligible 
One."  Hence  Plutarch  calls  Osiris  "  the  first 
god,"  al^o  "  the  benefactor."  Isis  is  made  the  sec- 
ond or  female  principle,  being  passive,  receptive, 
the  mediating  instrument  of  generation.  Hence 
she  is  called  the  wife  of  Osiris,  being  the  medium 
of  the  active  agency  of  the  first  god  or  Xoyos,  and 
so  termed  "  nurse  "  and  "  mother."  Here  Isis  is 
made  to  correspond  to  the  Platonic  principle  of 
matter  as  a  purely  passive,  negative  element,  and 
not  a  direct,  efficient  cause  of  evil.  Horus  repre- 
sents the  result  of  the  united  action  of  the  first 
and  second  gods.  He  is  thus  the  son  of  Osiris  and 
Isis,  made  in  his  Father's  image,  son  of  the  Aoyo?, 
the  sensible  image  of  the  intelligible  being  or  idea 
of  good.  In  this  view  Horus  represents  Plato's 
phenomenal  world,  which  was  created  or  generated 
from  the  divine  or  eternal  reason,  by  the  mediation 
of  the  world  soul,  which  was  a  prior  creation  of 
that  reason  (vovs,  Xoyos).     It  can  be  seen  at  once 


142  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

that  Plutarch  leaves  out  of  his  comparison  of  the 
Platonic  and  Egyptian  trinitarianism  the  world 
soul  or  mediating  principle,  which  plays  so  large  a 
part  in  Plato's  system,  and,  further,  confounds  the 
negative  material  element  of  Plato  with  Typhon, 
the  active  agent  of  evil  in  the  Egyptian  myth. 
He  seeks  to  cover  these  gaps  by  his  doctrine  of 
Isis,  who  is  made  to  represent  Plato's  matter,  the 
passive  nurse  of  generation,  and  also  his  "  world 
soul,"  or  active  mediating  principle.  Isis  thus  has 
an  active  as  well  as  passive  aspect,  is  mother  as 
well  as  wife,  the  active  soul  Qpvxn)  ^-s  well  as 
medium  and  "  nurse  "  of  the  generating  activity  of 
the  first  god  (vovs,  \6yo%).  The  result  of  this  skill- 
ful manipulation  is  that  he  is  able  to  bring  the 
three  principles  of  existence  of  Plato,  namely,  1. 
Intelligible  being  or  idea,  2.  Phenomena  or  indi- 
vidual things,  3.  Matter  or  space  as  the  receptacle 
or  nurse  of  generation,  into  apparent  harmony 
with  these  three  mythical  beings,  Osiris,  Isis,  and 
Horus.  How  far  he  was  successful  in  his  inter- 
pretation does  not  here  concern  us  :  the  point  of 
interest  is  that  in  his  interpretation  Plutarch  gives 
us  his  construction  of  Platonism,  which  in  his  view 
has  a  trinitarian  basis,  and  is  in  essential  philoso- 
phical accord  with  the  Egyptian  triad  as  philoso- 
phically explained. 

As  to  the  character  of  this  trinity  which  Plu- 
tarch finds  in  the  Platonic  philosophy  and  the 
Egyptian  religion,  it  is  to  be  remarked  that  it  dif- 
fers considerably  from  the  mythological  triads  of 


GREEK  PHILOSOPHICAL  TRINITARIANISM    143 

the  earlier  Ethnic  religions.  Had  Plutarch  treated 
the  myth  of  Osiris,  Isis,  and  Horus  in  a  historical 
and  critical  way,  he  would  have  found  many  in- 
teresting points  of  relationship  between  it  and  the 
mythological  triads  of  his  Graeco-Roman  ancestors. 
The  Osiris  of  Egypt  is  the  Zeus  of  Homer  in 
one  aspect.  So  Isis  closely  corresponds  in  some 
of  her  attributes  to  Athene.  But  Plutarch  did  not 
approach  the  subject  as  a  critical  historian.  His 
standpoint  was  that  of  a  philosophical  eclectic, 
and  his  consequent  effort  to  harmonize  an  Egyp- 
tian myth  with  a  Greek  speculation  must  be  ac- 
counted a  failure.  It  failed  to  do  justice  to  either 
side.  Plutarch's  triad  has  no  real  affinity  with 
the  Egyptian  mythological  trinity,  and  is  equally 
a  spurious  development  of  the  Platonic  dualism. 
As  I  have  said,  Plato  was  no  trinitarian.  His 
construction  of  deity  was  whoUy  theistic  without  a 
tinge  of  real  tritheism.  His  philosophical  dualism 
led  him  to  his  doctrine  of  three  ultimate  principles 
of  existence ;  but  his  duaKsm  left  his  theistic  doc- 
trine of  God  untouched.  If  any  question  could 
arise,  it  would  be  whether  his  dualism  did  not  in- 
volve pantheism,  not  whether  it  led  to  tritheism. 
The  historical  significance  of  Plutarch's  "  Isis  and 
Osiris  "  is,  that  it  so  clearly  shows  which  way  the 
theological  winds  around  him  were  blowing.  A 
trinitarian  theory  of  the  universe  and  also  of  deity 
is  somehow  in  the  air,  and  Plutarch  takes  kindly 
to  it.  He  is  ready  to  mould  his  Platonism  into  a 
trinitarian  form,  and  the  Egyptian  myth  just  suits 


144  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

his  purpose.  But  why  is  he  so  ready  to  turn  his 
own  philosophy  into  a  trinitarian  direction  ?  Be- 
cause his  Platonism,  as  I  have  shown,  has  admitted 
a  new  evolution  principle  which  has  radically 
transformed  it,  and  a  trinity  of  some  sort  is  the 
very  bridge  he  needs  as  a  passageway  from  the 
unity  of  original  being  to  the  multiplicity  of  the 
phenomenal  world.  In  the  history  of  Greek  phi- 
losophy Plutarch  stands  midway  between  Plato 
and  Plotinus.  He  opened  the  path  from  theism 
to  pantheism,  which  Plato  hesitated  to  enter,  but 
which  Plotinus  carried  through  to  its  logical  re- 
sult, employing  the  philosophical  materials  fur- 
nished by  Plato  himself.  Plato  had  never  ad- 
justed his  theistic  faith  to  his  idealistic,  dualistic 
philosophy.  If  he  was  conscious  of  the  contradic- 
tion which  existed  he  gives  no  hint  of  any  such 
consciousness.  He  could  leave  this  hiatus  the 
more  easily  since  he  made  no  pretense  of  forming  a 
philosophical  system.  His  dialogues  contain  other 
similar  speculative  inconsistencies,  which  were 
only  partially  hidden  under  the  veil  of  irony  in 
which  he  so  often  indulged,  on  purpose,  appar- 
ently, to  afford  a  suitable  hiding-place  whenever 
he  needed  it.  Thus  it  became  the  great  aim  of 
Plato's  disciples  to  systematize  the  fruitful  but 
unadjusted  speculations  of  their  master.  It  was 
this  motive  that  developed  the  New  Platonic  evo- 
lution. From  Plato  to  Plotinus  this  effort  is  the 
sovereign  note  everywhere  visible.  It  does  not 
come  within  the  scope  of  this  survey  to  trace  this 


GREEK  PHILOSOPHICAL  TRINITARIANISM    145 

evolution  any  further  than  is  required  by  the 
trinitarian  factor  which  so  essentially  belongs  to 
it.  Enough  to  note  here  that  only  one  of  two 
courses  was  open  to  Plato's  disciples,  —  either  to 
surrender  the  Platonic  metaphysical  idealism  and 
fall  back  on  a  crude  dualism  as  the  basis  of  the 
Platonic  theism,  or  to  surrender  Plato's  theism 
altogether  and  to  allow  his  metaphysical  ideal  the- 
ories to  run  their  logical  course  into  a  consistent 
pantheism.  The  latter  alternative  was  the  one 
accepted.  Thus  the  further  history  of  Platonism 
is  marked  by  the  steps  taken  in  this  direction. 
Plato's  metaphysical  speculations  were  made  the 
basis  of  further  speculative  thought,  while  his 
theism  gradually  dwindled  to  a  mythological  meta- 
phor, —  theistic  terms  being  employed  with  a  pan- 
theistic meaning.  Two  steps  especially  are  to  be 
noted  in  this  pantheistic  advance. 

First,  Plato  treated  God  as  a  personal  being, 
the  Creator  and  Father  of  the  world,  representing 
him,  however,  in  his  ideal  theory  as  the  "idea 
of  the  good."  But  how  can  an  idea,  which  is  a 
pure  abstraction,  be  a  person  or  a  seK-conscious 
agent  ?  Plato  left  the  knot  as  he  foimd  it ;  but 
his  followers  avoided  the  dilemma  by  a  logical  step 
which  eliminated  it.  Behind  Plato's  concrete  per- 
sonal mind  (voGs  or  \0y05)  the  New  Platonist  placed 
the  abstraction  of  simple  existence  (^rb  Iv,  to  ov), 
—  a  purely  logical  formula,  without  attributes  or 
qualities,  and  possessing  nothing  but  a  subjective 
reality  ;  for  how  can  an  abstract  idea  exist  except 


14f$  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

in  a  concrete  mind  endowed  with  the  power  of 
abstraction  ?  But  such  a  logical  starting-point  of 
being  suited  the  speculative  tendencies  of  this 
profoundly  metaphysical  age.  Moreover,  the  basis 
of  it  had  been  laid  by  Plato  himself.  In  his 
"  Republic  "  Plato  had  described  the  "  idea  of  the 
good"  as  the  "universal  author  of  all  things 
beautiful  and  right,  parent  and  lord  of  light  in 
this  world,  and  the  source  of  truth  and  reason  in 
the  other  "  (Rep.  517),  thus  plainly  identifying 
the  "  idea  of  the  good  "  with  God  himself ;  and  yet 
in  another  passage  (509,  B.),  he  had  described  this 
same  "  idea  of  the  good "  as  "  above  aU  essential 
or  individual  being  "  (to  iTriKuva  t^s  ovo-tas).  This 
isolated  expression,  which  Plato  had  casually 
dropped  from  his  pen  without  explanation  or  repe- 
tition, became  the  New  Platonic  definition  of  the 
highest  or  first  deity.  Evolution  of  a  pantheistic 
sort,  as  we  have  already  seen,  explained  the  rest. 
Plotinus,  as  we  shall  see,  made  great  use  of  this 
definition.  His  first  hypostasis  (vTrocrraorts)  or 
principle  of  being  is  a  pure  impersonal  abstraction, 
"  the  one "  (to  Iv),  a  simple  principle  of  unity 
without  a  single  quality  of  any  sort ;  yet  he  again 
and  again  calls  this  abstraction  God  or  Father, 
and,  in  describing  it,  uses  the  personal  pronoun 
in  the  masculine  gender.  Unless  this  peculiarity 
of  Plotinian  nomenclature  is  borne  in  mind,  the 
reader  of  the  Enneads  will  often  be  led  astray. 

The    second    step   grew   out   of    the   question 
whether  the  eternal  ideas  of  Plato's  metaphysical 


GREEK  PHILOSOPHICAL  TRINITARIANISM    147 

world  were  interior  to  the  divine  reason  or  ex- 
terior and  independent.  I  am  aware  of  the  oppos- 
ing views  entertained  by  critics  concerning  this 
vexed  question  which  lies  at  the  very  root  of  the 
Platonic  philosophy ;  but  the  more  thoroughly  one 
enters  into  Plato's  point  of  view,  the  clearer  grows 
one's  conviction  as  to  his  real  position,  and  what 
the  study  of  Plato's  dialogues  plainly  indicates  is 
amply  sustained  by  the  later  Platonic  evolution. 
The  key  to  that  evolution  is  to  be  found  only  in 
the  right  understanding  of  Plato's  own  doctrine  of 
ideas,  which  was  incontestably,  that  they  are  not 
apart  from  and  independent  of  God,  but  are  inte- 
rior to  the  divine  reason  (vow  or  Xoyos),  and  are 
employed  by  God  as  the  patterns  and  causes  of  aU 
phenomena.  This  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Republic, 
where  Plato  made  the  "  idea  of  the  good,"  which 
he  placed  at  the  summit  of  the  ideal  world,  to  be 
identical  with  God  himself.  So,  also,  in  the 
Timaeus,  God  the  father  and  creator  forms  all 
things  after  the  pattern  of  the  eternal  ideas  con- 
tained in  his  own  reason  (^Xoyo';').  But  New  Pla- 
tonism  tended  to  the  opposite  view.  As  it  reduced 
the  first  absolute  God  to  mere  oneness  without 
attributes,  it  could  not  look  upon  the  ideas  which 
were  the  types  and  causes  of  things  as  inhering  in 
this  first  God.  The  world  of  ideas  was  located  in 
the  mind  of  a  second  God,  who  was  himself  the 
principle  of  intelligence  (vovs)  generated  by  a  nat- 
ural evolution  from  the  first  God. 

These  two  steps  led  the  way  to  the  fuUy  devel- 


148  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

oped  New  Platonic  trinity.  This  trinity  first  ap- 
pears in  a  crude  shape  in  Numenius.  Numenius 
was  a  philosophical  writer  of  the  latter  half  of  the 
second  century,  and  thus  stands  midway  in  time 
between  Plutarch  and  Plotinus.  He  claimed  to 
be  a  regenerator  of  philosophy,  and  sought  to  re- 
turn to  the  pure  fountains  of  Pythagoras  and 
Plato.  In  Socrates  and  Plato  he  thought  that  he 
found  a  real  divine  trinity.  This  trinity  he  de- 
scribed as  "  three  gods,"  —  a  "  first  god,"  who  was 
the  absolute  one  (vovs),  self-conscious  yet  unable 
to  create  or  actively  employ  the  ideas  that  inhered 
in  the  divine  intelligence ;  a  "  second  god,"  who  by 
generation  from  the  first  god  became  the  active 
embodiment  of  the  eternal  ideas  and  the  Demiurge 
or  maker  of  the  world  ;  and  the  "  third  god,"  who 
was  generated  from  the  second  god,  and  was  the 
active  intelligent  principle  of  the  created  world. 
Thus  we  have  for  the  trinity  of  Numenius,  1,  the 
Supreme  Deity ;  2,  the  Demiurge  ;  3,  the  Cosmos 
or  world.  It  will  be  seen  that  this  view  of  the 
principles  of  the  divine  being  differs  considerably 
from  that  of  Plato.  Plato  did  not  distinguish  the 
Demiurge  or  Creator  from  the  Supreme  God.  His 
strict  theism  prevented  it.  He  treated  the  eternal 
ideas  which  were  the  patterns  and  causes  of  things 
as  immanent  in  the  divine  being,  and  actively  op- 
erative in  the  divine  mind  in  the  construction  of 
the  material  universe.  How  Numenius  could  have 
read  his  evolutionary  pantheistic  ideas  into  Plato 
it  is  impossible  to  guess,  as  but  a  few  fragments 


GREEK  PHILOSOPHICAL  TRINITARIANISM    149 

of  his  writings  have  come  down  to  us.  He  may- 
have  seen  a  spurious  "  Epistle  "  which  was  attrib- 
uted to  Plato  and  contained  a  passage  that  dis- 
tinguished a  "  jfirst,"  "  second,"  and  "  third  "  god. 
This  spurious  epistle  was  plainly  the  work  of  some 
New  Platonic  disciple.  Whatever  be  the  truth 
about  this,  one  fact  becomes  more  and  more  clear, 
that  the  whole  Platonic  school,  from  Plutarch  on, 
was  drifting  steadily  toward  a  trinitarian  panthe- 
ism. The  special  significance  of  Numenius  lies  in 
the  fact  that  he  pushed  the  trinitarian  element  to 
the  front,  and  thus  directly  prepared  the  way  for  the 
Plotinian  trinity. 

A  word  or  two  more  is  required  concerning  the 
speculations  of  Numenius,  that  the  connection  be- 
tween him  and  Plotinus  may  be  more  clear.  The 
most  marked  peculiarity  of  the  Numenian  trinity 
is  its  generation  doctrine.  Numenius  calls  his 
three  gods,  TraTTTros,  cKyovos,  and  aTroyovos, — literally 
"grandfather,  immediate  offspring,  and  more  re- 
mote offspring,"  or,  as  it  might  be  put,  "Father, 
son,  and  grandson."  Thus  the  whole  evolution  of 
the  world  is  regarded  as  a  generative  process  from 
beginning  to  end.  We  have  seen  the  generative 
principle  playing  an  important  part  in  the  Ethnic 
mythological  trinities.  We  also  found  it  early  in 
the  development  of  Platonism  into  New  Platonism, 
though  not  in  Plato  himself.  Plato  makes  God  an 
active  creator,  not  a  passive  instrument  of  genera- 
tion. But  the  generative  idea  appears  in  Philo  in 
Lis  Xoyos  doctrine,  and  still  more  fully  in  Plutarch, 


160  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

who  makes  the  third  member  of  the  triad  the  gen- 
erated son  of  the  first  and  second  members.  It 
was  reserved,  however,  for  Numenius  to  apply  the 
generative  principle  to  the  whole  trinity,  and  to 
make  the  Supreme  Being  father  of  the  second  god, 
the  Demiurge,  and  grandfather  of  the  third  god, 
the  world.  We  shall  see  how  completely  Plotinus 
accepted  this  fertile  suggestion. 

There  is  one  other  point  in  Numenius's  scheme 
which  demands  a  word  of  explanation.  What 
does  Numenius  mean  in  calling  the  world  a  god, 
and  a  member  of  tjie  divine  trinity  ?  Of  course 
his  pantheism  explains  it  in  part.  In  his  view  the 
whole  universe,  from  the  highest  to  the  lowest 
forms  of  existence,  is  one  substance,  and  contains 
one  essential  divinity.  But  a  further  word  should 
be  added.  Numenius  derived  from  Plato  the  idea 
that  not  only  what  we  call  the  material  world,  with 
its  earth,  sun,  moon,  and  stars,  was  an  animated 
being  as  a  whole,  but  also  that  each  individual 
body,  earth,  sun,  or  star,  was  an  animal  or  living 
intelligent  being,  deriving  its  animated  life  from 
the  world-soul,  which  dwelt  in  the  universe  as  the 
soul  of  man  dwells  in  his  body.  How  fruitful  a 
germ  of  pantheistic  tendencies  this  theory  was 
needs  no  unfolding.  The  truth  is  that  Plato's 
idealistic  dualism  was  a  seed-bed  of  the  most  di- 
verse philosophical  tendencies.  His  doctrine  of 
nature  was  both  idealistic  and  hylozoistic.  Aris- 
totle, in  this  respect,  was  a  consistent  disciple,  and 


GREEK  PHILOSOPHICAL  TRINITARIANISM    151 

hence  we  shall  see  in  our  further  studies  how  phi- 
losophical schools  of  the  most  antagonistic  charac- 
ter can  claim  these  two  great  founders  of  Greek 
speculative  thought  as  their  masters.  We  now 
pass  to  Plotinus. 


CHAPTER  Vni 

THE  GEEEK  PLOTINIAN   TRINITY 

There  is  a  close  historical  connection  between 
Plotinus  and  Numenius.  Porphyry,  Plotinus's 
disciple,  tells  us  that  the  writings  of  Niunenius 
were  among  those  that  were  read  in  the  school  of 
Plotinus  for  discussion  and  criticism ;  but  he  takes 
pains  to  add  that  Plotinus  was  not  a  mere  fol- 
lower of  Numenius,  but  developed  a  "  more  accu- 
rate "  philosophy.  This  is  plain  at  a  glance.  The 
differences  between  Plotinus  and  Numenius  are 
palpable  and  radical,  and  show  that  Plotinus  pro- 
ceeded upon  entirely  original  lines  of  philosophic 
thought.  Two  points  are  sufficient  to  illustrate 
this.  First,  Numenius  made  the  Demiurge  or 
world-maker  the  second  principle  or  member  of 
his  trinity ;  while  Plotinus  transfers  the  work  of 
the  Demiurge  to  the  third  principle  of  the  triad. 
A  second  point  of  difference  is  still  more  radical. 
Numenius  made  the  Cosmos  or  world  a  member  of 
his  trinity,  —  a  rude  device,  showing  how  chaotic 
and  incomplete  was  his  trinitarianism,  and  how 
far  he  failed  to  understand  the  idealistic  dualism 
of  Plato,  whom  he  regarded  as  his  forerunner.  It 
was   Plotinus  who  revived   the  central  truth   of 


THE  GREEK  PLOTINIAN  TRINITY        153 

Platonism  and  raised  upon  it  a  speculative  meta- 
physic  in  which  the  spiritual  world  as  the  eternally 
real  is  carefully  distinguished  from  the  phenom- 
enal. This  fact  is  revealed  in  his  new  trinity,  from 
which  the  Cosmos  or  visible  universe  is  discarded, 
and  in  its  place  a  new  spiritual  principle  is  substi- 
tuted. On  the  whole,  it  is  evident  that  Plotinus 
was  under  no  special  obligations  to  any  of  his  pre- 
decessors, except  so  far  as  this,  that  he  was  a  wide 
student  of  Greek  philosophy  on  aU  sides,  having 
spent  his  early  life  in  Alexandria,  the  headquar- 
ters of  all  the  Greek  schools  in  the  third  century. 
The  two  philosophers  who  most  influenced  him 
were  Plato  and  Aristotle.  His  references  to  Plato 
are  numerous,  and  he  plainly  regarded  him  as 
his  philosophical  master.  How  far  he  was  con- 
scious of  his  wide  variations  from  Plato  it  is  not 
easy  to  say.  My  own  judgment  is  that  he  re- 
garded himself  as  a  true  follower  of  Plato,  but  ex- 
ercised freely  the  functions  of  a  critic,  and  looked 
upon  his  own  philosophical  system  as  a  legitimate 
and  logical  unfolding  of  Plato's  speculations.  In 
fact,  as  has  already  been  mentioned,  while  he  ad- 
hered to  the  spiritualistic  idealism  of  Plato,  he 
dismissed  entirely  the  Platonic  element  of  person- 
ality as  fundamental  to  the  spiritual  realm,  and 
built  the  most  complete  metaphysical  system  of 
idealistic  pantheism  that  the  world  has  seen. 
The  influence  of  Aristotle  upon  Plotinus  is  also 
marked.  His  chief  deviations  from  Plato  are  on 
Aristotelian  lines,  especially  his  whole  theory  of 


IM  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

the  origin  of  the  world  as  an  evolution  of  phenom- 
enal movements  and  activities,  which  involve  an 
unmoved  and  motionless  mover  or  principle  of 
motion.  Plato  made  God  an  active  causal  agent 
in  the  formation  of  the  world,  which  had  a  begin- 
ning ;  while  Aristotle  held  that  the  world  must  be 
eternal,  since  the  principle  of  all  motion  must  be 
eternal,  and  so  eternally  productive  of  motion  in 
the  physical  universe.  Plotinus  accepted  the  view 
of  Aristotle,  and  made  it  the  basis  of  his  trinita- 
rianism.  But  while  Plotinus  shows  a  thorough 
acquaintance  with  aU  the  great  thinkers  before 
him  in  the  Greek  world,  and  even  adopts  many  of 
their  ideas,  it  still  remains  true  that  his  philoso- 
phical system  is  essentially  original.  This  is  pre- 
eminently true  of  his  trinitarianism. 

Before  I  proceed  to  a  description  of  the  Ploti- 
nian  trinity,  I  wish  to  emphasize  this  fact,  so  that 
the  profound  significance  of  Plotinus  as  a  religious 
thinker,  and  of  his  religious  system  as  compared 
with  other  systems,  may  be  duly  impressed  on  the 
minds  of  my  readers.  Of  no  other  trinitarian 
system  can  it  be  said  that  it  is  the  creation  of  a 
single  religious  genius.  AU  other  Ethnic  trinities, 
as  we  have  seen,  were  the  slow  result  of  a  long 
evolution,  and  their  origins  are  hid  in  the  darkness 
of  the  primeval  world,  out  of  which  they  finally 
emerged  into  the  light  of  historical  times.  Neither 
Zoroaster  nor  Buddha  nor  any  single  Hindoo  sage 
laid  the  foundations  of  the  Zoroastrian  or  Hindoo 
triads.     The   Greek   mythological   trinity    which 


THE  GREEK  PLOTINIAN  TRINITY        165 

forms  so  tender  a  background  to  the  story  of  the 
Odyssey  had  floated  down  into  the  Homeric  world 
from  an  unknown  past.  Plato  was,  on  the  whole, 
the  most  creative  trinitarian  thinker  before  Ploti- 
nus,  and  sowed  the  speculative  seed  which  finally 
produced  the  Plotinian  trinity.  But  Plato  himself 
was  not  a  trinitarian  in  any  sense.  He  was  a 
monotheist;  and  before  a  trinity  could  emerge 
from  his  theistic  philosophy,  the  whole  character 
of  it  had  to  be  changed.  I  have  already  traced 
that  change  through  Philo,  Plutarch,  and  Nume- 
nius.  Not  till  the  Platonic  monotheism  had  become 
a  New  Platonic  pantheism  could  a  metaphysical 
trinity  be  built  on  Platonic  foundations.  This  was 
the  truly  original  work  of  Plotinus.  It  is  a  his- 
torical fact  worthy  of  careful  attention  and  remem- 
brance, that  the  two  great  philosophical  trinities  of 
the  ancient  world,  the  Hindoo  and  the  New  Pla- 
tonic, are  essentially  pantheistic,  and  could  have 
been  developed  only  from  pantheistic  principles. 
Two  words  describe  the  essence  of  Plotinianism, 
pantheism  and  trinitarianism,  and  in  the  Plotinian 
system  each  element  involves  the  other.  It  is  in- 
deed true  that  Plotinus  does  not  baldly  assert  his 
pantheistic  ideas,  though  they  lie  at  the  basis  of  all 
his  thinking;  but  he  places  his  trinity  in  the  fore- 
front of  his  philosophy,  and  makes  his  three  hy- 
postases or  principles  of  being  the  root  and  centre 
of  his  whole  explanation  of  the  universe,  includ- 
ing man  in  his  origin,  character,  and  destiny,  and 
also  nature  from  the  highest  to  the  lowest  forms 


166  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

of  phenomenal  existence.  What  establishes  and 
stamps  as  genuine  the  originality  of  this  wonderful 
system,  viewed  simply  as  a  product  of  speculative 
thought,  is  its  completely  metaphysical  and  trans- 
cendental character.  Every  trinity  before  that  of 
Plotinus  has  mythological,  legendary,  or  historical 
elements  incorporated  more  or  less  completely  in 
its  composition.  Even  pliilosophers  like  Heraclei- 
tus,  Empedocles,  Anaxagoras,  and  Plato  himself, 
frequently  f eU  back  on  mythological  ideas  in  order 
to  bridge  the  speculative  gaps  in  their  thought. 
But  no  such  "  wood,  hay,  stubble  "  are  mixed  with 
the  pure  metaphysics  of  Plotinus.  His  "  three 
hypostases,"  The  One,  The  Mind,  The  Soul  (to  If, 
6  vovs,  rj  ^vxn),  are  in  no  sense  mythological  and 
have  no  mythological  background  ;  they  are  wholly 
transcendental  creations  of  the  speculative  reason, 
— the  result  of  the  sublimest  flights  of  abstract 
thought,  dealing  with  the  great  mysteries  of  the 
world  and  man  and  God.  Hence,  although  the 
mediative  principle  drawn  from  Plato  is  conspic- 
uous in  the  Plotinian  trinity,  it  remains  wholly 
transcendental,  never  lowering  itself  to  the  point 
of  a  divine  incarnation.  There  is  nothing  in  Plo- 
tinus to  remind  one  of  the  God-man,  Krishna,  in 
the  Hindoo  trinity,  or  Sosiosh  or  Mithra  in  Zoro- 
astrianism,  or  the  Virgin  Athene  of  Greek  mytho- 
logy. This  fact  grows  the  more  remarkable,  when 
one  considers  that  all  the  historical  elements  that 
have  entered  into  the  development  of  the  various 
Ethnic  trinities  appear  in  the  Plotinian,  namely, 


THE  GREEK  PLOTINIAN  TRINITY        167 

the  peculiar  significance  of  three^  the  family  or 
generative  principle,  and  the  mediation  principle. 
Why,  then,  we  may  weU  ask,  did  Plotinus  leave 
out  the  natural  idea  of  a  divine  incarnation  ?  The 
answer  becomes  plain  only  when  the  character  of 
Plotinus  himself  and  of  his  speculative  system  is 
clearly  understood.  The  more  I  study  the  man 
himself  and  his  writings,  the  more  fully  I  compre- 
hend how  aloof  and  apart  he  was  from  all  external 
influences,  and  how  original  was  the  character  and 
scope  of  his  genius.  Less  creative  and  poetic  than 
Plato,  he  far  excelled  him  in  the  rigid  consistency 
and  reach  of  his  speculations.  No  ancient  thinker 
has  ever  looked  so  steadily  and  unweariedly  into 
the  face  of  eternal  and  spiritual  realities  as  Ploti- 
nus, —  a  man  in  truth  of  the  sublimest  faith  in 
the  imseen  God.  Such  a  man,  living  so  entirely 
in  the  upper  world,  would  naturally  have  developed 
out  of  idealistic  premises  an  abstract  and  logical 
metaphysic  that  would  have  no  room  for  any  de- 
scent to  earth  and  time  such  as  an  incarnation  of 
God  demands.  In  short,  an  incarnation  is  logi- 
cally impossible  in  any  strict  and  consistent  meta- 
physical scheme.  Such  a  scheme  must  complete 
itself  on  purely  metaphysical  lines.  It  cannot 
descend  from  the  metaphysical  to  the  physical, 
phenomenal,  historical  plane  without  violating  its 
own  cardinal  principles.  And  here  is  revealed  the 
secret  of  Plotinus's  power  as  a  thinker,  and  of  the 
tenacity  of  his  grip  upon  critical  thought.  While 
mythologies   and    speculative    systems    that    are 


168  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

founded  upon  legendary  traditions  are  fading  out, 
like  a  shore  fog  under  the  morning  sun,  the  rigid, 
logical,  and  intensely  metaphysical  system  of  Plo- 
tinus  is  proving  itself  to  be  the  most  vital  and 
indestructible  of  the  world's  speculative  treasures. 
Whether  it  is  to  stand  or  faU,  one  thing  is  certain, 
that  neither  scientific  nor  historical  criticism  can 
directly  touch  it ;  for  it  starts  and  remains  far 
above  all  merely  phenomenal  events,  though  in- 
cluding them  as  shadowy  and  subordinate  incidents 
of  its  wonderful  panorama  of  existence.  With  my 
own  historical  instincts  developed  and  fortified  by 
a  life  of  historical  study  and  teaching,  I  confess  to 
a  strong  disinclination  to  enter  and  tread  such  an 
airy  path.  The  Plotinian  solution  of  the  universe 
is  not  for  such  as  I.  But  at  aU  events  the  histor- 
ical critic  cannot  treat  it  as  he  can  mythological 
and  legendary  cosmogonies.  He  can  only  acknow- 
ledge that  it  lies  whoUy  beyond  his  own  historical 
and  critical  sphere.  Yet  this  can  be  said  ;  if  meta^- 
physics  shall  prove  to  be  the  master  key  to  the 
world's  enigmas, —  which  I  am  not  yet  ready  to 
grant,  —  commend  me  to  the  optimistic  trinitarian 
idealism  of  Plotinus. 

I  hope  that  I  have  in  some  measure,  by  these 
preliminary  statements,  prepared  the  way  for  the 
direct  consideration  of  the  Plotinian  trinity.  I 
shall  not  attempt  to  unfold  the  subtleties  of  Plo- 
tinus's  speculations,  except  so  far  as  may  be  neces- 
sary for  the  explanation  of  his  trinitarian  views. 

Strange  as  it  may  seem,  the  great  aim  of  Plo- 


THE  GREEK  PLOTINIAN  TRINITY        159 

tinus  in  aJI  his  metaphysical  writings  is  wholly 
practical  and  religious  ;  it  is  to  defend  the  reality 
of  man's  higher  and  immortal  nature  against  the 
materialism  and  skepticism  of  his  age.  Epicure- 
anism, though  decadent,  still  haunted  men  with 
its  denials  of  a  future  spiritual  existence.  Even 
Stoicism,  with  aU  its  lofty  ethical  ideas,  sanctified 
and  embalmed  in  the  noble  writings  of  Epictetus, 
Seneca,  and  Marcus  Aurelius,  rested  on  a  mate- 
rialistic basis  that  could  give  no  clear  assurance  of 
a  personal  immortality.  Against  all  such  ideas 
Plotinus  sought  to  raise  a  solid  barrier  in  his  meta- 
physical philosophy.  This  aim  animates  him  aU 
through  his  speculations,  even  in  their  most  trans- 
cendental flights,  and  imparts  to  them  an  intense 
moral  earnestness.  No  more  serious  explorer  after 
religious  truth  ever  lived.  In  this  respect  Plotinus 
belongs  to  that  select  class  of  "  seekers  after  God," 
"  if  haply  they  might  feel  after  him  and  find  him," 
which  includes  such  thinkers  and  seers  as  Buddha, 
Zoroaster,  Socrates,  Plato,  Plutarch,  and  Marcus 
Aurelius.  Equally  for  them  all  the  great  object 
of  their  intellectual  efforts  was  to  find  a  resting- 
place  for  religious  faith,  —  a  solid  basis  of  security 
and  comfort  mid  the  moral  evils  and  mysteries  and 
uncertainties  of  this  mortal  life.  At  times  in  Plo- 
tinus this  moral  enthusiasm  breaks  forth  in  pas- 
sages of  marvellous  mystical  insight  and  beauty, 
which  raise  his  strangely  harsh  and  involved  style 
of  thought  to  a  rhythmic  heavenly  strain  that  sur- 
prises and  almost  startles  us.      This  moral  and 


160  THE  ETHNIC   TRINITIES 

religious  quality  is  well  illustrated  in  the  famous 
chapter  (En.  V.  1.)  :  "  Concerning  the  three  sov- 
ereign hypostases  or  principles  of  being"  (HcptTwv 
Tptwv  apxiKiov  vTToo-Tao-tcov),  to  which  I  now  call  spe- 
cial attention.  The  very  first  sentence  strikes  the 
ethical  note  which  remains  as  a  minor  key  through- 
out, and  at  the  close  gathers  every  single  various 
chord  into  one  grand  melody :  "  How  happens  it 
that  souls  become  forgetful  of  God  their  Father, 
though  they  have  sprung  from  him  and  are  wholly 
of  him,  and  are  thus  made  ignorant  of  him  and 
also  of  their  own  divine  nature  ?  "  The  question  is 
answered  by  tracing  this  obliviousness  to  the  union 
of  the  soul  with  matter,  as  a  consequence  of  which 
man  is  turned  away  from  his  divine  source  toward 
lower  corporeal  things.  "Hence  souls  seeing 
neither  God  nor  themselves  despise  themselves 
through  ignorance  of  their  divine  lineage."  Plo- 
tinus  next  proceeds  to  point  out  the  true  remedy, 
namely,  that  they  should  be  converted  from  things 
below  them  "  and  be  raised  to  the  highest,  the  one 
and  the  first."  It  is  immediately  after  this  exor- 
diima  that  Plotinus  develops  his  trinitarian  doc- 
trine as  the  one  only  divine  method  by  which  souls 
thus  fallen  are  redeemed,  and,  having  finished  it, 
he  returns  to  his  starting-point,  thus  showing  that 
it  has  been  in  his  mind  aU  along.  Noting  the  dual 
character  of  the  soul  as  having  a  power  of  choice 
between  things  within  and  above  and  things  exter- 
nal and  inferior,  he  thus  closes  :  "  It  is  necessary, 
therefore,  if   the  soul   would   apprehend  what  is 


THE  GREEK  PLOTINIAN  TRINITY        161 

higlier,  that  its  attention  should  be  turned  inward. 
Just  as  when  any  one,  desiring  to  hear  a  voice  that 
pleases  him,  separates  himself  from  other  voices, 
and  opens  his  ear  to  the  sweeter  sound  as  it  draws 
near ;  so  here  also  it  is  necessary  for  the  soul  to  dis- 
miss external  and  sensible  sounds,  except  so  far  as 
may  be  needful,  in  order  to  keep  pure  and  ready 
for  use  its  introspective  power,  with  a  view  to 
hearing  voices  from  above." 

Such,  then,  is  the  point  of  view  from  which  Plo- 
tinus  proceeds  to  unfold  his  divine  trinity.  He 
starts  with  the  assumption  that  the  human  soul  is 
spiritual  and  consequently  immortal.  It  has  in- 
deed become  oblivious  of  its  divine  origin  because 
of  its  connection  with  the  body.  But  this  is  only 
a  temporary  condition.  The  true  higher  life  of 
the  soul  does  not  begin  with  temporal  things  or 
end  with  them.  This  leads  Plotinus  to  set  forth 
his  doctrine  of  the  soul.  It  has  in  its  present 
state  two  sides  or  aspects,  —  a  lower  side  which 
concerns  itself  with  phenomenal  and  temporal 
things,  and  a  higher  side  that  is  turned  toward  the 
intelligible  and  divine.  Here  Plotinus  assumes 
the  truth  of  the  Platonic  dualistic  idealism.  He 
distinguishes  the  eternal  world  of  ideal  spiritual 
beings  from  the  temporal  world  of  phenomena. 
This  dualistic  line  between  the  spiritual  and  ma- 
terial is  drawn  in  the  sharpest  manner  possible. 
Soul  and  body  belong  to  two  different  spheres  of 
being.  The  body  has  a  material  origin,  while  the 
soul  is  descended  from  the  spiritual  world.     But 


162  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

how  are  these  two  diverse  spheres  of  being  related 
and  bound  together?  Here  Plotinus  draws  his 
premise  from  Plato,  but  moves  on  to  a  more  con- 
sistent metaphysical  conclusion.  This  premise  is 
one  of  the  most  curious  speculations  in  the  history 
of  philosophy,  and  to  this  day  plays  no  small  part 
in  philosophical  thought.  Let  us  see  how  Plato 
was  led  to  it.  The  question  was  how  to  find  a 
standing-place  for  the  dualistic  theory,  and  make 
it  harmonize  with  the  unity  of  the  world.  It  is 
easy  enough  to  assume  dualism  as  a  fact.  The 
fundamental  differences  between  mind  and  matter 
are  patent  to  every  thinker.  But  how  to  adjust 
these  differences  and  explain  metaphysically  the 
nature  and  origin  of  the  union  between  such  di- 
verse forms  of  being  is  and  always  has  been  the 
Gordian  knot  of  philosophy.  In  considering 
Plato's  manner  of  dealing  with  it  one  must  re- 
member his  whole  point  of  view.  He  lived  in  a 
period  of  strong  reaction  from  the  Ionian  physi- 
cists, who  had  sought  to  find  in  nature  and  its 
phenomena  the  origin  of  the  world.  Anaxagoras 
had  suggested  that  behind  all  phenomenal  motion 
and  change  there  must  be  a  mover  or  principle  of 
motion,  and  that  such  a  principle  must  be  simple 
and  beyond  all  mixture  or  change.  This  principle 
he  called  mind  (voCs).  Out  of  this  pregnant 
thought  was  evolved  the  dualistic  school  of  Socra- 
tes and  Plato.  Its  whole  aim  was  to  resist  the 
materialistic  skepticism  which  in  the  Sophistic 
schools  was  becoming  more  and  more  popular,  and 


THE  GREEK  PLOTINIAN  TRINITY        163 

to  build  on  metaphysical  foundations  a  spiritual 
philosophy.  The  suggestion  of  Anaxagoras  was 
made  the  starting-point.  Behind  matter  is  mind. 
Above  the  physical  is  the  metaphysical.  The  true 
eternal  realities  are  ideal,  not  phenomenal.  The 
visible  world  has  its  basis  in  the  invisible.  All 
individual  concrete  things  are  only  copies  in  time 
of  God's  eternal  ideas,  which  are  the  patterns  and 
causes  in  the  divine  mind  of  this  phenomenal  uni- 
verse. Plato  shows  little  regard  for  scientific 
studies.  What  little  science  there  was  in  his  day 
was  superficial  guesswork,  and  led  to  no  conclu- 
sive results.  Plato  sought  "  a  more  excellent  way,'* 
—  the  way  of  metaphysical  speculation.  He 
boldly  entered  the  unseen  transcendental  sphere, 
and  established  himself  on  the  speculative  princi- 
ple that  all  real  truth  is  eternally  existent  in  the 
mind  of  God.  This  is  his  famous  theory  of  ideas. 
But  Plato  was  not  a  pure  idealistic  monist.  He 
held  to  the  secondary  reality  of  matter.  He  could 
not,  even  from  his  idealistic  point  of  view,  deny 
the  facts  before  his  eyes  as  to  the  temporal  reality 
of  the  visible  world.  How  shall  he  unite  the  two 
worlds?  How  shall  God,  with  his  eternal  ideas 
or  patterns  of  things,  become  a  creator?  Plato 
might  have  jumped  the  whole  mystery  in  the  He- 
brew fashion,  and  declared  that  God  created  the 
world  by  a  simple  fiat,  "  out  of  nothing,"  as  it  was 
explained  by  Jews  and  Christians  in  later  times. 
But  Plato  was  not  to  be  caught  in  such  a  meta- 
physical  trap.      "Out   of    nothing   nothing   can 


164  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

come  "  was  as  familiar  to  him  as  to  Epicureans  of 
a  later  day.  Here  there  appears  the  curious  spec- 
ulation on  which  he  dares  to  risk  his  whole  meta- 
physical system.  The  facts  to  be  explained  and 
harmonized  are  those  which  involve  two  separate 
and  seemingly  radically  different  worlds.  What 
is  the  tie  between  them?  How  can  dualism  be 
sustained?  In  this  wise.  The  ultimate  fact  of 
the  material  world  is  multiplicity  involving  motion 
and  change ;  the  ultimate  fact  of  the  spiritual 
world  is  unity,  and  sameness,  and  unchangeability. 
These  two  facts  are  the  opposite  poles  of  aU  exist- 
ence. But  it  must  be  remembered  that  such  facts 
are  only  subjectively  and  logically  true.  "  Same- 
ness and  otherness "  are  mere  abstractions  and 
generalizations  of  the  mind,  and  are  logically  true 
only  so  far  as  they  are  abstracted  in  thought  from 
real  objects  in  nature  and  experience.  But  Plato 
made  this  principle  of  logical  division  a  metaphy- 
sical one,  and  treated  it  as  if  it  were  an  objective 
cardinal  truth  in  the  nature  of  things. 

This  purely  speculative  and  barren  assumption 
was  adopted  by  Plotinus.  "  Sameness  and  other- 
ness," he  says,  "are  the  first  of  things "(xptora). 
How  so  logical  and  rigid  a  thinker  as  Plotinus 
could  have  been  willing  to  stand  on  so  slippery  a 
speculation  need  cause  no  surprise.  Let  him  who 
has  not  sinned  in  this  way  cast  the  first  stone. 
But  in  judging  him  we  must  not  lose  sight  of  his 
great  object  in  laying  down  such  assumptions. 
He   wishes   to   build   a  metaphysical   system  on 


THE  GREEK  PLOTINIAN  TRINITY        165 

wMcli  lie  may  rest  his  doctrine  of  the  soul.  Is 
the  soul  mortal  or  immortal,  of  earth  or  of  heaven  ? 
If  immortal  and  of  heavenly  origin  and  mould, 
how  has  it  been  so  closely  united  with  a  mortal 
body  ?  "  Sameness  and  otherness  "  is  the  "  open 
sesame."  Plotinus,  like  previous  Greek  philoso- 
phers from  Thales  to  Plato,  started  with  oneness 
as  the  ultimate  principle  of  nature  and  the  world. 
Whatever  that  principle  be,  water,  air,  fire,  the 
imlimited,  number,  it  was  essentially  one.  All 
schools  down  to  Heracleitus  allowed  this.  But 
how  explain  the  changes  and  processes  of  pheno- 
mena ?  "  Otherness  "  involving  multiplicity  is  the 
counter  principle  through  which  nature  acts,  and 
to  which  God  himself  is  subject  as  the  Demiurge 
or  world-former.  Plato  in  the  Timaeus  represents 
God  as  making  the  world-soul  before  the  world  it- 
self, out  of  two  elements :  "  the  unchangeable  and 
indivisible,  and  the  divisible  and  corporeal."  Thus 
was  formed  "  an  intermediate  essence  partaking  of 
the  same  and  of  the  other ^''  By  "  the  same  "  Plato 
meant  the  eternal  spiritual  world  "  which  always 
is  and  has  no  becoming  "  or  change,  and  by  "  the 
other  "  he  meant  the  material  substratum  of  things 
which  Plato  conceived  as  a  purely  negative  princi- 
ple, sometimes  called  by  him  "  space,"  which,  how- 
ever, was  a  necessary  condition  of  creation,  "  the 
receptacle,  and  in  a  manner  the  nurse  of  aU  gen- 
eration." Thus  the  world-soul  was  formed  out  of 
the  two  fundamental  principles  of  things,  "the 
same  and  the  other,"  and  became  the  mediating 


166  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

element  in  the  creation  of  the  phenomenal  world. 
Such  was  Plato's  dualistic  conception  of  God,  the 
world-soul,  and  "  the  corporeal  universe  which  was 
formed  within  and  around  her."  These  Platonic 
speculations  are  imbedded  in  the  Plotinian  philo- 
sophy. 

But  we  are  seeking  in  all  this  curious  transcen- 
dentalism the  germs  of  the  Plotinian  trinity,  and 
we  are  now  ready  to  ask  what  trinitarian  germs,  if 
any,  does  Plato's  view  contain.  First,  we  have 
the  Supreme  God,  who  is  represented  by  Plato  as 
the  principle  of  intelligence  (voC?),  of  reason  (\6yos^j 
and  of  goodness,  and  the  maker  of  a  good  world. 
With  this  intent  God  first  formed  the  soul  (t/^x^) 
as  an  intermediate  being  to  be  the  instrument  of 
creation.  Thus  there  emerges  a  second  member 
of  the  triad,  namely,  the  Demiurge.  But  here  the 
evolution  pauses.  Let  us  now  see  how  Plotinus 
completes  his  trinity  on  Plato's  foundation.  It  is 
first  of  aU  to  be  noted  that  Plato  does  not  make 
the  world-soul  an  eternal  principle  of  being.  So 
that  he  after  all  remains  firmly  monotheistic.  The 
world-soul  is  a  creation  in  time,  and  not  therefore 
to  be  placed  on  a  par,  in  any  sense,  with  the  eter- 
nal God.  In  truth,  Plato's  world-soul  which  he 
constructs  so  fancifully  out  of  "  sameness  and 
otherness  "  is  simply  a  deus  ex  machina  extempo- 
rized for  the  purpose  of  bridging  the  troublesome 
chasm  between  two  separate  worlds.  It  is  just 
here  that  Plotinus  deviates  from  his  master,  and 
the  deviation  is  radical  and  profound.     It  is  the 


THE  GREEK  PLOTINIAN  TRINITY        167 

step  already  noted  from  theism  to  pantheism. 
Plato's  God  was  a  self-conscious  intelligent  per- 
sonal being,  possessing  reason  (vovs,  Aoyo?).  Plato 
called  him  Father  and  Creator.  His  first  creative 
act  was  the  forming  of  the  world-soul  to  be  the 
mediating  instrument  in  the  formation  of  the 
world.  This  whole  cosmogony  disappears  in  Plo- 
tinus,  and  gives  place  to  a  thoroughly  pantheistic 
view.  Plotinus  cannot  conceive  of  the  first  prin- 
ciple of  the  world  as  a  personal  mind  (yovs),  intel- 
ligent and  active.  Such  intelligence  and  activity 
involves  a  primary  principle  behind  it.  Here  Plo- 
tinus introduces  the  AristoteKan  axiom  that  motion 
implies  a  mover  who  causes  motion  but  is  not 
moved.  The  first  principle  or  Absolute  God  of 
both  Aristotle  and  Plotinus  is  not  an  active  being 
who  by  his  intelligence  and  causal  energy  brings 
the  world  into  existence,  but  a  pure  deus  ex 
machina,  like  Plato's,  devised  to  fill  the  gap  in 
their  philosophy.  Aristotle  stopped  at  this  point ; 
he  did  not  take  the  further  logical  pantheistic  step 
and  hold  that  the  first  principle  was  above  all  lim- 
itations or  qualities  of  any  sort,  and  hence  imper- 
sonal. He  described  God  as  a  mind  (yov's)  eter- 
nally occupied  in  self-contemplation,  and  then  left 
him  as  it  were  swinging  in  the  metaphysical  air, 
to  be  the  football  of  philosophical  critics  who  have 
ever  since  wrestled  over  the  never  settled  question 
whether  Aristotle  was  a  theist  or  pantheist  or 
atheist.  The  truth  is  that  Aristotle  left  this  point 
where  he  found  it,  since  it  lay  beyond  the  field  of  his 


168  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

inquiries,  wliicli  were  scientific  rather  than  specu- 
lative. But  Plotinus  was  not  satisfied  with  such 
an  iUogical  result.  If  the  first  god  is  not  subject 
to  motion  and  active  intelligence,  he  cannot  be  a 
truly  intelligent  being.  Intelligence  and  the  ex- 
ercise of  the  eternal  ideas  which  are  the  patterns 
and  causes  of  aU  lower  forms  of  life  must  belong 
to  a  second  and  derived  god.  Thus  the  way  is 
prepared  for  the  fuU-fledged  Plotinian  trinity: 
"The  One,  The  Mind,  and  The  Soul"  (rh  Iv,  5 
voi)s,  ^  ^vxrf)'  Behind  the  First  God  and  Father 
of  Plato  (6  lov  or  6  voOs)  another  god  is  inserted  by 
Plotinus  (to  Iv),  so  that  Plato's  one  and  only  God 
becomes  in  Plotinus  a  second  principle.  The  com- 
pletely pantheistic  character  of  the  Plotinian  sys- 
tem is  here  seen.  His  First  God  is  not  a  person 
or  even  an  active  principle.  Activity  proceeds 
from  him,  since  he  is  the  first  cause  of  aU  activity, 
but  the  first  principle  itself  can  be  defined  only  as 
"  The  One."  It  is  "  superior  to  all  essence,"  for 
aU  essence  or  active  intelligent  being  is  derived 
from  it,  and  what  is  derived  must  be  inferior  to 
the  cause  of  such  derivation.  I  need  not  dwell  on 
the  curious  argument  of  Plotinus  in  defense  of  his 
position  that  "  The  One  "  is  the  only  proper  name 
of  the  "  first  hypostasis  "  or  god.  It  is  purely  spec- 
ulative, logical,  and  subjective.  Most  curious  of 
all,  perhaps,  is  his  idea  that  the  first  god  is  "  The 
One  "  because  he  is  above  or  superior  to  number^ 
as  to  everything  else.  But  is  not  one  a  number  as 
much  as  two  or  three  ?     Why,  then,  is  the  first 


THE  GREEK  PLOTINIAN  TRINITY       169 

principle  any  more  superior  to  number  than  the 
second  or  the  third,  and  why  is  the  first  principle 
any  the  less  an  essence  than  the  second  or  third  ? 
Of  course  "  one  "  is  the  actual  initial  terminus 
of  all  numbers,  and  so  Plotinus  was  compelled  to 
accept  it  as  the  logical  basis  of  his  trinity.  It  is  a 
remarkable  evidence  of  his  sense  of  the  unreality 
of  his  logical  definition  of  "  The  One  "  that  he  so 
constantly  applies  to  it  another  name,  namely, 
«  The  Good ; "  for  what  is  "  The  Good  "  if  not  a 
moral  and  personal  being  ?  Plotinus  was  led  to 
this  second  definition  of  his  first  god  by  his  Pla- 
tonism.  Plato's  ideal  theory  culminated  in  "  the 
idea  of  the  good,"  which  Plato  himself  identified 
with  his  personal  God.  Plotinus  avoids  this  logi- 
cal contradiction,  —  for  ideas  are  abstractions,  not 
persons,  —  by  separating  all  conscious  ideas  from 
the  First  God  and  placing  them  in  the  Second  God 
(o  vovs).  Thus  his  First  God  is  without  ideas  of 
any  sort,  —  a  mere  principle  of  unity  and  nothing 
more.  Why,  then,  did  he  so  often  style  his  first 
principle  "  The  Good "  (^rb  KaXw),  thus  taking 
away  with  one  hand  what  he  had  given  with  the 
other?  There  is  but  one  answer  possible.  In 
every  rigidly  metaphysical  system  there  must  lie 
somewhere,  more  or  less  concealed,  a  premise  which 
involves  a  logical  break.  In  Plato  it  was  his  the- 
ory of  ideas  which  he  treated  as  real  entities  inde- 
pendent of  and  apart  from  aU  individual  pheno- 
mena. But  an  idea  is  an  abstract  universal  and 
cannot  be  individualized.     Yet  Plato  jumped  this 


170  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

logical  chasm,  and  identified  his  highest  universal, 
"  the  idea  of  the  good,"  with  a  personal  God.  Plo- 
tinus  avoided  this  dilemma  by  adopting  the  pan- 
theistic view  of  God,  which  placed  him  above  all 
personal  qualities,  but  the  same  logical  antinomy- 
met  him  at  another  point.  If  God  is  above  all 
moral  qualities  and  limitations,  how  can  he  be 
called  "  good  ?  "  But  how  could  Plotinus  build  a 
moral  system  issuing  in  a  moral  universe,  with  souls 
that  are  on  an  upward  road  toward  the  highest 
holiness  and  blessedness,  without  a  moral  or  good 
first  principle?  For  according  to  his  own  fre- 
quently expressed  axiom,  whatever  is  derived  must 
be  inferior  to  its  cause,  and  how  then  can  an  un- 
moral first  cause  produce  a  moral  world  ?  We  must 
not  forget  that  Plotinus  was  from  first  to  last  a 
moral  and  religious  thinker.  In  the  end  metaphy- 
sical consistency,  in  his  case  as  in  that  of  so  many 
others,  had  to  give  way  to  the  interests  of  religion. 
The^rs^  and  second  principles  of  Plotinus  hav- 
ing thus  been  developed  out  of  Plato's  one  God, 
the  way  is  prepared  for  the  third.  In  his  doctrine 
of  "  The  One  "  and  "  The  Mind,"  one  metaphysical 
question  has  been  answered,  namely,  how  an  intel- 
ligent active  cause  of  the  world  can  be  specula- 
tively connected  with  the  eternal  first  principle  of 
aU  being.  But  a  second  question  now  emerges : 
how  can  the  divine  Mind  put  into  operation  the 
ideas  which  are  the  patterns  and  causes  of  aU  cor- 
poreal phenomena  and  bridge  the  chasm  which 
separates  mind  from  matter  ?     A  third  principle 


THE  GREEK  PLOTINIAN  TRINITY        171 

is  needed,  inasmucli  as  the  second  principle  is  not 
competent  for  this  work  by  itself,  since,  as  Ploti- 
nus  conceives,  its  sole  activity  and  life  consists  in 
turning  itself  toward  the  first  principle  and  receiv- 
ing its  eternal  energy  of  being  and  good.  Only 
by  the  generation  out  of  Mind  of  a  third  principle 
can  the  end  be  secured.  This  third  principle  is 
the  soul  (^^vxrj^,  which,  being  derived  from  Mind, 
is  inferior  to  it,  and  so  is  conceived  of  by  Plotinus 
as  endowed  with  a  double  capacity,  namely,  to  turn 
towards  Mind  as  its  generative  cause  of  life  and 
activity  and  also  towards  the  material  element 
which  Plotinus,  as  a  Platonist,  holds  to  be  eter- 
nally existent  as  a  pure  capacity  or  possibility  of 
life  when  a^ted  upon  and  vitalized  by  "  The  Soul." 
But  where,  we  may  ask,  does  Plotinus  get  this 
double  aspect  and  capacity  of  the  soul  ?  If  the 
second  principle  of  being,  the  Mind,  has  only  a 
capacity  of  turning  toward  its  superior  and  cause, 
—  the  first  principle,  the  One  or  Good,  —  why 
should  not  the  same  be  true  of  the  third  principle, 
the  Soul  ?  But  this  natural  question  does  not 
seem  to  trouble  Plotinus.  The  inductive  method 
of  reasoning,  which  demands  some  basis  of  fact  or 
evidence  from  experience,  was  far  from  his  sphere 
of  thought.  It  was  enough  for  him  that  his  grand 
pantheistic  scheme  demanded  it.  Beyond  his 
three  eternal  metaphysical  principles  of  being  hov- 
ered a  secondary  principle  of  matter  on  which  the 
three  immaterial  principles  must  operate,  if  the 
world  is  to  be  formed,  and  it  was  the  third  subor- 


172  THE  ETHiTIC  TRINITIES 

dinate  principle,  Soul,  that  was  necessitated  to  do 
this  work.  It  is  the  same  old  problem  which  the 
dualist  always  has  to  solve:  how  get  across  from 
mind  to  matter.  Plotinus  cuts  the  knot  by  giving 
to  the  third  hypostasis,  soul,  a  double  character 
and  faculty.  Soul,  he  says,  has  two  or  even  three 
parts.  "  One  part  of  it  always  abides  on  high,  an- 
other part  is  conversant  with  sensible  or  corporeal 
things,  and  another  stiU  has  a  subsistence  between 
them."  Of  course  it  is  now  easy  for  the  soul  to  pre- 
serve its  relation  to  the  two  principles  from  which 
it  is  generated  and  to  which  it  must  always  turn, 
and  yet  be  "  drawn  downward  "  by  its  closeness  to 
matter,  and  become  the  generator  of  the  material 
world,  and  even  temporarily  forgetful,  at  least  in 
part,  of  its  divine  origin.  Just  here  is  the  precise 
point  where  the  Platonic  theism  becomes  the  Plo- 
tinian  pantheism.  Plato  bridges  the  dualistic 
chasm  by  a  purely  creative  act,  leaving  the  meta- 
physical higher  world  stiU  separate  from  the  lower 
phenomenal  world ;  but  Plotinus  fiUs  the  chasm 
which  he  allows  to  exist  in  the  nature  of  things  by 
extending  over  it  the  same  generative  power  and 
activity  which  he  makes  the  essential  bond  and 
force  of  his  metaphysical  trinity. 

We  have  seen  how  important  a  part  this  theory  of 
generation  has  played  in  all  trinitarian  views ;  but  in 
Plotinus  for  the  first  and  the  last  time  it  is  not  only 
made  the  fundamental  characteristic  of  his  trinita- 
rianism  but  also  is  carried  forward  to  the  further 
evolution  of  the  whole  universe.    His  whole  evolu- 


THE  GREEK  PLOTINIAN  TRINITY        173 

tion  doctrine  is  founded  on  generation.  The  second 
principle,  Mind,  is  generated  from  tlie  first  princi- 
ple, the  One,  and  the  third  principle,  the  Soul,  is 
equally  generated  from  Mind.  He  defends  this 
view  by  declaring  that  the  very  perfection  of  God 
requires  that  he  should  generate  an  image  of  him- 
self, catching  his  idea  from  Plato,  who  declared 
that  God,  being  good,  must  manifest  his  goodness 
in  the  creation  of  a  good  world.  But  Plotinus  goes 
still  further.  The  soul,  too,  since  it  is  a  true  image 
of  God,  must  generate  a  true  image  of  itself.  This 
image  must  be  inferior  to  its  pattern  ;  and  as  the 
soul  is  the  lowest  form  or  principle  of  the  spiritual 
world,  and  as  that  which  is  next  below  it  is  matter, 
its  generative  power  must  be  exercised  on  matter, 
and  produce  the  material  world.  This  generative 
process  is  conceived  by  Plotinus  as  without  begin- 
ning. Not  only  does  the  Plotinian  trinity  exist 
by  eternal  generation^  but  the  world  is  equally 
eternal.  The  principle  of  progression  which  the 
terms  generation  or  evolution  would  seem  to  in- 
volve is,  with  Plotinus,  as  he  directly  asserts,  logi- 
cal, not  chronological.  Closely  connected  with  the 
Plotinian  theory  of  generation  in  the  trinity  is 
that  of  subordination.  The  one  is,  in  fact,  involved 
in  the  other.  Hence  the  second  principle  is  infe- 
rior to  the  first,  and  the  third  to  the  second.  So 
the  temporal  or  phenomenal  world  is  inferior  to 
the  ideal  world,  and  in  the  lower  world  itself  the 
same  law  works  through  a  downward  movement  to 
the  lowest  possible  forms  of  nature. 


174  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

Two  things  are  especially  to  be  noted  in  this 
scheme  of  the  universe.  In  the  first  place,  Ploti- 
nus  draws  the  line  sharply,  as  we  have  seen,  be- 
tween the  metaphysical  and  the  physical  at  the 
point  next  below  the  soul.  His  trinity  is  wholly 
metaphysical.  The  soul  itself  is  whoUy  of  spirit- 
ual origin  and  nature,  and  even  when  individual- 
ized in  human  bodies  it  may  recognize  its  divine 
parentage  and  know  in  its  own  moral  conscious- 
ness that  it  is  homoousios  (complete  in  likeness) 
with  God.  After  aU,  then,  it  may  be  asked,  is  not 
Plotinus  a  true  dualist  rather  than  a  pantheist? 
But  note  where  his  doctrine  of  generation  carries 
him.  AU  generation  involves  the  transmission  of 
the  essential  nature  of  the  author  of  generation. 
If  the  soul,  as  the  third  principle  of  divinity,  has 
generated  the  world,  then  the  world  thus  gener- 
ated must  contain  the  essential  principle  of  divin- 
ity, though  in  a  lower  form  ;  and  this  is  precisely 
the  view  of  Plotinus.  His  reported  last  words 
show  this  :  "  I  go  hence  to  carry  the  divine  in  me 
to  the  divine  in  the  universe,"  —  a  phrase  which 
contains  the  very  essence  of  pantheism.^ 

The  second  thing  to  be  noted  is  this.  It  is  curi- 
ous to  find  Plotinus  contending  against  the  Chris- 
tian Gnostic  sect,  which  held  to  a  long  series  of 
divine  emanations  of  which  the  preexistent  Christ 
in  the  form  of  vovs  or  Xoyos  was  the  first,  that  such 
a  series  of  emanations  must  be  limited  to  three, 

^  See  critical  note  on  Plotinus's  pantheism  at  the  end  of  this 
chapter. 


THE  GREEK  PLOTINIAN  TRINITY        175 

In  short,  lie  held  that  the  forms  or  principles  of 
the  eternal  divine  being  were  in  the  very  nature 
of  things  confined  strictly  to  a  fixed  number, 
namely  tJiree^  and  that  no  increase  or  diminution 
was  possible,  and  he  entered  into  a  detailed  argu- 
ment to  prove  it.  It  is  needless  to  say  that  Plo- 
tinus  here  perhaps  surpasses  himself  in  this  specu- 
lative spinning  of  spiders'  webs.  But  why  was  he 
so  solicitous  to  guard  his  doctrine  of  "  three  hypos- 
tases ?  "  Was  not  his  whole  system  Gnostic  in 
its  essential  character  ?  Had  he  not  bridged  the 
dualistic  chasm  more  completely  than  the  Gnostics 
themselves?  Without  the  slightest  doubt.  Why, 
then,  did  he  go  out  of  his  way  to  attack  them  ? 
The  reason  is  clear.  He  feared  the  result  of  his 
own  speculations.  How  could  he  answer  the  ques- 
tion inevitably  raised  concerning  his  system, 
whether  any  real  dualism  was  left  ?  His  reply  is 
found  in  the  line  that  he  draws  so  insistently  be- 
tween "  the  three  hypostases  "  and  the  rest  of  the 
universe.  But  the  question  remains  and  will 
not  down :  Why,  from  the  Plotinian  pantheistic 
point  of  view,  should  the  number  of  the  divine 
principles  of  being  stop  with  three  ?  What  subtle 
metaphysical  significance  in  the  number  three  is 
there  which  should  make  it  give  absolute  law  to 
the  mode  of  existence  of  the  divine  nature  ?  And, 
further,  why,  on  the  Plotinian  theory,  should  the 
line  of  division  between  mind  and  matter  occur 
just  at  this  point  ?  Why  should  not  the  descend- 
ing force  of  generation  lose  itself  so  gradually  and 


176  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

secretly  in  lower  forms  of  life  that  it  would  not  be 
possible  for  any  keenest  metaphysical  eye  to  see 
it?  Plotinus  gives  no  answer.  He  does  not  even 
seem  aware  that  any  answer  is  needed.  But  while 
he  was  intent  on  preserving  the  form  of  dualism 
by  his  doctrine  of  three  hypostases,  it  must  be  re- 
cognized that  his  trinity  is  as  pantheistic  as  the 
rest  of  his  system.  His  three  principles  of  being 
"  The  One,  Mind,  and  Soul,"  are  not  three  per- 
sonal individual  beings.  Plotinus  did  not  employ 
the  term  vTrooT-acris  (hypostasis)  with  the  meaning 
afterwards  applied  to  it  by  Athanasius  or  by  Ori- 
gen.  I  must  refer  the  reader  to  my  previous  vol- 
ume for  an  account  of  the  changes  of  meaning  that 
this  word  underwent  in  the  theological  nomencla^ 
ture  of  the  fourth  century.  Enough  here  to  say 
that  to  Plotinus,  as  to  Plato  and  Aristotle,  vTroa-- 
Ttto-is  meant  the  underlying  essence  or  principle  of 
things.  He  conceived  of  three  such  essential  forms 
as  lying  at  the  basis  of  aU  existence.  To  the  "  one 
or  good  "  he  would  not  allow  even  any  hypostatic 
character,  since  it  was  "  superior  to  all  essence  " 
and  could  not  be  numbered,  as  all  individual  be- 
ings can  ;  so  that  we  must  regard  his  employment 
of  the  term  hypostasis  to  designate  "  the  one  "  as 
a  yielding  to  the  necessities  of  language,  and  to  be 
interpreted  in  an  improper  or  metaphorical  sense. 
The  second  principle,  mind,  in  the  Plotinian  trin- 
ity was  an  hypostatic  being,  though  not  person- 
alized, but  only  separated  from  "  the  one  "  by 
"  otherness  "  or  difference.    Hence  Plotinus's  spec- 


THE  GREEK  PLOTINIAN  TRINITY        177 

Illation  that  "  mind,  essence,  otherness,  and  same- 
ness are  the  first  existences,"  by  which  he  meant 
that  "  the  one,"  being  without  aU  qualities  or  defi- 
nition, was  beyond  essence,  and  hence  not  a  true 
hypostasis  or  being,  though  "  the  first  cause  "  of 
aU  being.  The  use  made  by  Plotinus  of  the  Pla- 
tonic term  "  the  same  and  the  other "  is  curious. 
No  such  distinction  can  apply,  he  thinks,  to  "  the 
one."  It  first  begins  to  emerge  in  the  second 
hypostasis.  Mind,  and  appears  in  the  ideas  of  the 
Mind,  which  can  be  numbered  ;  hence  Mind  is 
essence,  since  it  "  can  be  circumscribed."  But  it 
is  in  the  third  hypostasis,  the  soul,  tha,t  "  oth- 
erness "  has  fullest  play.  For  soul  comes  into 
contact  with  matter  in  which  "  otherness  "  or  mul- 
tiplicity has  its  true  abiding-place.  It  is  in  tliis 
way  that  "  otherness  "  becomes  a  part  of  the  bridge 
over  which  Plotinus  is  able  to  pass  from  "the 
one,"  which  is  only  "  the  same,"  and  hence  un- 
changeable, to  "  the  many,"  that  is,  the  pheno- 
menal world.  How  airy  and  unsubstantial  such 
a  speculative  bridge  is  needs  no  argument.  To 
build  on  it  a  whole  philosophical  system  would  be 
impossible  to  any  one  who  had  not  a  complete 
faith  in  metaphysics  as  the  key  of  all  knowledge. 
Such,  indeed,  was  the  faith  of  Plotinus,  and  having 
constructed  out  of  his  own  speculations  this  meta- 
physical passageway  from  earth  to  heaven,  which 
might  well  be  compared  to  the  Zoroastrian  bridge 
of  Chinevad,  —  so  narrow  that  even  the  righteous 
could  not  pass  over  it  alone,  without  falling  into 


178  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

the  abyss  below,  —  lie  traveled  it  with  a  confidence 
that  is  sublime. 

It  may  be  asked  whether  the  trinity  of  Plotinus 
is,  after  all,  anything  more  than  a  playing  with 
words.  Certainly  it  is  not  a  tri-personal  trinity.  In 
this  respect  it  differs,  as  we  have  seen,  from  all  the 
mythological  triads  of  the  Ethnic  religions,  and 
can  be  compared  only  with  the  Hindoo  Brahmanical 
trlmurti.  But  even  in  the  Hindoo  triad  there  is 
a  mythological  basis  and  element,  so  that  the  Plo- 
tinian  trinity  remains  to  this  day  the  solitary  ex- 
ample of  a  pantheistic  trinitarianism,  which  is 
wholly  consistent  with  itself.  At  a  later  point  in 
our  study  we  shall  compare  the  trinity  of  Plotinus 
with  that  of  the  Christian  religion.  I  may,  how- 
ever, anticipate  that  comparative  survey  so  far  as 
to  say  that  the  logical  tendency  toward  pantheism 
which  is  inherent  in  every  philosophical  form  of 
trinity  is  illustrated  in  the  Christian  dogma  in  its 
later  Augustinian  SabeUian  form,  and  especially 
in  the  present  efforts  of  theologians  who  still  wear 
the  trinitarian  mask  to  harmonize  their  so-called 
trinitarianism  with  a  monistic  philosophy.  It  is 
interesting  to  observe  that  the  old  Platonic-Plo- 
tinian  speculative  device  of  "  sameness  and  other- 
ness," with  all  its  pantheistic  implications,  is  still 
employed  as  though  it  were  really  something  more 
than  a  metaphysical  snare  to  catch  the  unwary. 

I  cannot  leave  this  analysis  of  the  Plotinian 
trinity  without  once  more  bearing  testimony  to  my 
profound  sense  of  the  moral  fervor  of  Plotinus's 


THE  GREEK  PLOTINIAN  TRINITY        179 

writings.  Such  a  brief  analysis  as  has  been  at- 
tempted can  convey  no  adequate  idea  of  the  im- 
pression which  the  Enneads  make  on  the  mind- 
I  have  given  a  mere  skeleton  of  the  Plotinian 
trinitarian  philosophy.  To  see  it  clothed  in  its 
proper  body,  and  arrayed  in  the  fair  form  of  the 
Plotinian  mystical  idealism,  one  must  study  deeply 
and  patiently  that  wonderful  compound  of  specu- 
lative thought  which  was  gathered  into  the  En- 
neads by  Plotinus's  great  disciple.  Porphyry. 

The  extremely  metaphysical  character  of  Ploti- 
nus's writings  seems,  at  first  sight,  to  indicate  an 
excessive  intellectualism.  But  such  is  not  the  fact. 
Metaphysic  was  for  Plotinus  the  highest  form  of 
truth,  and  truth  was  equally  for  him  the  life  of  re- 
ligion. The  words  put  by  the  author  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel  on  the  Hps  of  Christ,  "  I  am  the  way,  the 
truth,  and  the  life,"  caught  their  idealistic  mean- 
ing from  the  same  headspring  that  fed  Plotinus's 
soaring  spirit.  AU  the  loftiest  spiritual  natures 
have  always  drawn  their  visions  of  divine  truth 
fi'om  faith  in  an  unseen  ideal  world,  and  from  a 
metaphysic  that  gives  a  foundation  to  the  doctrine 
of  the  soul's  essential  spirituality  and  divinity.  I 
do  not  forget  the  criticism  of  Augustine  upon 
"the  Platonic  books,"  in  which,  no  doubt,  the 
works  of  Plotinus  were  included,  as  he  compared 
them  with  the  scriptures,  namely,  that  though 
these  books  gave  a  vision  of  heavenly  things  and 
"  the  land  of  peace,"  they  failed  "  to  show  the  way 
thither."     But  surely  such  a  view  of  "  the  land 


180  THE  ETHNIC   TRINITIES 

that  is  very  far  off  "  as  Plotinus  held  up  before 
the  soul  has  no  small  part  to  play  in  the  enkin- 
dling of  its  immortal  yearnings  and  energies,  and  in 
its  true  awakening  from  forgetfulness  of  its  divine 
original  and  home ;  and  such,  in  fact,  is  the  effect 
of  a  thorough  study  of  this  marvelous  thinker. 
Airy  and  unsubstantial  though  his  metaphysic 
may  be,  yet,  once  the  bridge  is  crossed  from 
earth  to  heaven,  the  soul  feels  that  somehow  its 
true  eternal  resting-place  is  reached.  No  one  can 
drink  deeply  of  Plotinus  without  becoming  con- 
scious that  the  Plotinian  stream  was  somehow 
drawn  from  the  fountains  of  eternal  truth,  how- 
ever much  we  may  criticise  the  channels  through 
which  its  living  waters  have  flowed.  Surely  such 
words  as  these  with  which  the  Enneads  close  have 
a  far  off  and  supernal  ring :  "  Such  is  the  life  of 
the  gods,  and  of  divine  and  happy  men  free  from 
all  external  things  here  below,  —  a  life  above  the 
senses  and  its  pleasures,  —  a  flight  of  the  Alone 

to  the  Alone  Q^vyri  jxovov  Trpos  fiovov). 

I  have  alluded  to  Porphyry,  who  wrote  the  life 
of  Plotinus  and  to  whom  we  owe  the  preservation 
of  his  master's  teachings.  A  letter  of  Porphyry 
to  his  wife  Marcella,  recently  brought  to  light,  is 
a  beautiful  illustration  of  the  New  Platonic  reli- 
gious spirit.  No  more  pious,  or  sweet  and  touch- 
ing revelation  of  a  man's  inner  spiritual  life  can 
be  found  in  epistolary  literature,  —  written  as  it 
was  in  aU  the  freedom  of  a  private  correspondence, 
in  a  season  of  forced  absence.     With  a  pathetic 


THE  GREEK  PLOTINIAN  TRINITY        181 

tenderness  he  turns  the  thoughts  of  his  life-com- 
panion away  from  his  earthly  self,  whose  separa^ 
tion  from  her  she  is  mourning,  to  that  higher 
spiritual  self  that  is  ever  present  with  her,  and 
with  which  she  may  continually  commune;  and 
from  this  point  of  view  he  leads  her  upward  into 
the  larger  spiritual  life  that  is  open  to  all  good 
and  loving  souls.  The  whole  epistle  is  redolent 
with  the  pure  atmosphere  of  heaven.  The  writer 
seems  to  live  habitually  in  the  clear  vision  of  di- 
vine things,  while  earth  and  time  and  all  their 
petty  affairs  fade  out  of  view.  Is  it  aU  fine  writ- 
ing, a  sort  of  "  Epistle  to  Posterity  ?  "  I  cannot 
think  so.  I  would  rather  believe  that  Porphyry, 
like  his  master  Plotinus,  was  one  of  those  seekers 
after  God  who  found  Christ's  own  words  true: 
"  Seek  and  ye  shall  find,  knock  and  it  shall  be 
opened  unto  you." 

In  concluding  this  survey  of  the  Ethnic  trini- 
ties and  before  proceeding  to  a  comparison  of 
them  with  the  Christian  dogma,  I  wish  to  call  at- 
tention to  the  remarkable  freedom  of  the  Ethnic 
trinitarian  ideas  from  gross  and  degrading  super- 
stitions, and  to  the  growing  elevation  and  moral 
purity  of  Ethnic  thought  in  the  progress  of  the 
ages.  The  study  of  comparative  religion  has  done 
much  to  remove  the  traditional  Christian  preju- 
dice concerning  the  real  origin  and  character  of 
these  religions.  It  has  been  the  custom  in  Chris- 
tian ecclesiastical  history  to  apply  the  terms  "  pa- 
gan "  and  "  heathen  "  to  them  in  a  bad  sense,  as 


182  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

if  they  were  essentially  evil  and  false,  —  the 
work  of  evil-minded  men  and  even  of  diabolical 
supernatural  beings.  Such  views  were  born  of 
historical  ignorance.  Our  survey  shows  that  the 
Ethnic  religions,  especially  in  their  ideas  of  God 
and  of  the  supernatural  sphere,  are  the  result  of 
the  earnest  efforts  of  men,  in  the  dawn  of  moral 
consciousness  and  under  the  dim  light  of  the  earli- 
est divine  revelations,  to  learn  the  truth  concern- 
ing God  and  his  relations  to  this  world.  The 
crudeness  of  their  ideas,  as  seen  in  the  oldest 
mythologies  and  cosmogonies,  does  not  lessen  our 
sense  of  the  truly  moral  and  religious  character  of 
such  efforts  to  find  God  and  to  bring  him  down 
within  the  reach  of  human  scrutiny  and  faith  and 
worship.  Rather  our  sympathy  grows  for  these 
ancestors  of  our  race  as  we  realize  more  fully  how 
meagre  was  their  religious  light  compared  with 
ours.  Surely  there  were  men  of  great  faith  among 
them,  even  if  the  objects  of  their  faith  seem  to  us 
so  allied  to  error  and  superstition.  One  cannot 
read  the  Odyssey,  or  the  JEneid,  or  the  moral  say- 
ings of  Buddha  or  Socrates,  or  the  writings  of 
Plato,  or  Plutarch,  or  Seneca,  or  Marcus  Aurelius, 
or  Plotinus,  or  Porphyry,  without  feeling  assured 
that  these  men  had  somehow  learned  the  great  se- 
cret of  communion  with  the  higher  world.  Paul's 
stern  indictment  against  heathenism  in  the  first 
chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  applies 
equally  to  a  degenerate  Christianity.  The  wicked 
practices  of  heathen  men  are  no  worse  than  those 


THE  GREEK  PLOTINIAN  TRINITY        183 

of  nominal  Christians,  and  are  not  to  be  con- 
founded with  the  efforts,  often  made  with  the  lof- 
tiest spirit  of  sacrifice,  of  either  Ethnic  or  Christian 
saints,  to  realize  the  moral  ideals  that  flitted  before 
their  aspiring  souls.  As  we  push  back  our  inves- 
tigations into  primeval  times,  the  religious  light 
grows  dimmer,  and  religious  ideas  and  beliefs 
grow  more  naturalistic,  and  fanciful,  and  tinged 
with  a  childish  spirit  of  fear,  but  the  reality  of 
this  early  religion  is  none  the  less  clear,  and  from 
it  are  plainly  drawn  whatever  moral  sanctions 
have  had  power  with  men.  Further,  the  upward 
progress  of  the  religious  beliefs  of  men  is  equally 
clear  as  the  path  of  history  from  the  beginning 
is  traced.  Compare,  for  example,  the  early  reli- 
gious ideas  of  Egypt  with  the  idealistic  philosophy 
of  Plotinus.  The  passage  from  the  Egyptian  ani- 
mal worship  to  the  Plotinian  transcendentalism 
involves  a  religious  evolution  that  is  vast  indeed, 
outstripping,  perhaps,  any  other  like  evolution  in 
human  experience,  whether  in  science,  in  history, 
or  in  philosophy. 


CRITICAL  NOTE  ON  THE  QUESTION  OF  PLOTI- 
NUS'S  PANTHEISM. 

Mr.  W.  R.  Inge  of  Oxford,  England  (Bampton 
Lecturer,  1899),  in  a  valuable  and  suggestive  article  in 
the  "  American  Journal  of  Theology,"  April,  1900,  on 
"  The  permanent  influence  of  Neo-Platonism  upon 
Christianity,"  holds  that  Plotinus  was  not  a  pantheist. 
He  says  (page  336)  that  Plotinus  sought  to  "  save  per- 


184  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

sonality  while  insisting  on  unity."  Does  Mr.  Inge  sup- 
pose that  the  "  three  hypostases  "  in  the  view  of  Ploti- 
nus  were  individual  personal  beings?  If  so,  I  must 
disagree  with  him  entirely.  In  the  Plotinian  vocabulary 
hypostasis  (vTroo-racrts)  did  not  mean  an  individual  or 
person.  Plotinus  used  the  term  in  the  sense  of  Aristotle 
as  an  underlying  principle  (apxr])  of  existence.  "  The 
One,  Mind,  Soul,"  were  in  no  sense  persons.  They 
were  super-personal.  Personality  and  separate  individ- 
uality for  Plotinus  involved  connection  with  matter. 
They  had  no  place  in  the  intelligible  or  ideal  world 
(Koa-fio?  vorp-6<s) .  Here  the  dualism  of  Plotinus  signifi- 
cantly appears.  The  two  worlds  are  "  separated " 
(xoiptcrOeyTo)  from  each  other  :  but  the  hypostases  "  are 
not  separated  from  each  other  "  (V.  1, 6.) ,  because  there 
is  nothing  between  them.  Separation  involving  individ- 
uality begins  with  the  union  of  spirit  and  matter.  Ploti- 
nus supports  his  position  with  the  assertion  of  Aristotle 
that  "  the  first  principle  is  separate  from  matter." 
Moreover,  he  declares  that  what  is  true  of  the  first  and 
second  principles  is  equally  true  of  the  third,  the  soul, 
viewed  in  its  higher  aspect.  "  We  must  not  inquire 
after  a  place  (xwpa)  where  we  may  establish  it,  but  it 
must  be  assigned  apart  (c^o))  from  all  place."  Only 
when  the  soul  has  become  embodied  in  nature  is  it  in- 
dividualized and  personalized.  It  is  in  harmony  with 
this  view  that  Plotinus  treats  the  human  soul  as  descend- 
ing from  a  pre-incarnate  impersonal  form  of  existence,  to 
awaken,  when  united  with  the  body,  to  a  self-conscious 
state  as  an  individualized  person,  and  at  death,  as  re- 
turning from  this  separated  corporeal  condition  to  the 
eternal  unity  of  the  all  in  all.  I  suspect  that  Plotinus's 
use  of  the  phrase  "  sameness  and  otherness  "  has  mis- 
led Mr.  Inge.  In  one  place  (V.  1,  6,  end)  Plotinus 
says  that  "  the  second  principle,  being  generated  from 


THE  GREEK  PLOTINIAN  TRINITY        185 

the  first  principle,  is  present  with  it  in  such  a  way  as  to 
be  separated  from  it  by  otherness  alone"  The  term 
"  separated  "  here  must  be  interpreted  in  the  light  of 
the  preceding  statement  already  quoted,  where  Plotinus 
insists  that  the  two  principles  are  not  separated.  The 
vacillation  in  language  here  observable  illustrates  the 
speculative  difficulty  in  which  Plotinus  as  well  as  Plato 
was  involved.  To  defend  his  dualism  he  must  intro- 
duce separation  somewhere.  He  begins  with  its  nega- 
tive or  idealistic  presence  in  the  intelligible  world,  as  a 
sort  of  shadowy  anticipation  of  its  real  existence  in  the 
form  of  multiplicity  and  separateness  in  the  phenome- 
nal world.  The  assertion  of  Mr.  Inge,  that  "  the  true 
sign  of  individuality  is  nx)t  separation  hut  distinction" 
as  applied  to  God  in  trinity,  certainly  savors  of  Sabel- 
lianism,  and,  as  applied  to  created  moral  beings,  as 
truly  savors  of  pantheism.  At  all  events,  such  lan- 
guage is  wholly  foreign  to  Plotinus.  For  him,  personality 
with  individual  self-consciousness  involves  separation, 
and  separation  is  the  attribute  of  matter.  Hence  his 
doctrine  of  the  ideal  world  and  of  its  trinity  is  wholly 
pantheistic.  He  allows  a  "  distinction  "  in  "  the  three 
hypostases,"  to  wit,  of  "  otherness  ;  "  but  not  of  separate 
personality.  Persons  belong  only  to  the  material  world 
of  multiplicity  and  change ;  but  even  their  personality 
is  rather  an  accident  than  a  fundamental  attribute  of 
being.  The  human  soul,  on  leaving  the  body,  its  tem- 
porary abode,  drops  with  the  body  all  the  accidents  of 
its  bodily  existence  and  returns  to  its  previous  ideal 
state,  where  aU  separation  ends  and  where  the  one  (to 
€v)  is  the  all  (ttolv)  and  the  all  is  one.  The  whole  of 
the  Enneads  is  saturated  with  the  Plotinian  panthe- 
ism; but  I  would  call  special  attention  to  the  fourth 
and  fifth  Books  of  the  sixth  Ennead  and  will  give  a  few 
extracts  in  support  of  what  I  must  regard  as  the  only 


186  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

possible  interpretation.  In  En.  VI.  4,  15,  Plotinus, 
speaking  of  the  relation  of  the  soul  to  the  body,  and  of 
the  comparative  good  and  evil  growing  out  of  such  a 
relation,  says  :  "  Why  is  the  liberation  of  the  soul  from 
the  body  good  ?  Because  while  it  is  not  of  the  body  in 
its  nature,  yet  when  it  is  spoken  of  as  such  through 
union  with  it,  it  becomes  somehow  partial  (fiepLKrj)  rather 
than  universal  (ck  rov  Travros)  :  for  its  energy  is  no 
longer  devoted  to  the  whole,  although  being  itself  of  the 
whole.  Just  as  if  one  who  is  learned  in  all  knowledge 
should  confine  himself  to  a  single  department  of  it.  For 
each  soul  when  wholly  separate  from  body  is  no  longer 
an  individual  (iKcto-ny)  :  but  when  separated  from  the 
ideal  world,  not  in  place  but  in  energy,  it  becomes  some- 
thing particular  (to  Kaff  iKatrrov)  and  is  a  certain  por- 
tion of  the  whole  rather  than  the  whole  itself,  though 
in  another  manner  it  is  universal ;  but  when  it  presides 
over  nothing  material  and  particular  it  is  wholly  uni- 
versal, though  retaining  its  capacity  of  partition."  I 
must  here  call  attention  to  Mr.  Inge's  apparent  misun- 
derstanding of  the  use  made  by  Plotinus  of  the  term 
cKacTTos  (each) .  He  says :  "  Plotinus  asserts  personality 
-—  Sei  (EKaarrov  cKaorov  cTvat."  But  Plotinus  in  the  pas- 
sage which  I  have  quoted  above  confines  the  application 
of  the  term  l/caorrov  to  the  world  of  matter ;  it  has  no 
place  in  the  world  of  spirit.  Does  Mr.  Inge  mean  that 
"  Plotinus  asserts  personality  "  in  this  present  world 
merely  ?  If  so,  I  have  no  controversy  with  him.  But 
this  is  far  from  proving  that  Plotinus  was  not  a  panthe- 
ist. No  one  of  course  denies  that  human  souls  in  the 
present  bodily  state  are  personal,  in  the  sense  of  being 
self-conscious  beings.  The  question  between  the  pan- 
theist and  the  theist  is  whether  such  personal  self-con- 
sciousness is  a  temporary  and  accidental  phenomenon 
or  an  essential  element  in  all  moral  existence. 


THE  GREEK  PLOTINIAN  TRINITY        187 

But  if  any  doubt  could  remain,  the  following  extracts 
would  seem  decisive.  "  It  is  universally  believed  among 
men  that  the  one  and  same  in  number  is  everywhere 
also  a  whole,  since  aU  men  from  the  movements  of  their 
own  free  moral  consciousness  declare  that  God  (t6v 
^eov)  is  in  each  of  us  as  one  and  the  same."  "  Under- 
stand, then,  that  this  God  is  not  in  one  place  or  another, 
but  equally  everywhere ;  but  if  God  is  everywhere  he 
cannot  be  divided  into  parts,  since,  then,  he  would  no 
longer  be  everywhere,  but  individual  parts  of  him  (eKao-- 
Tov  avTov  fiipos)  would  exist  in  different  places," and  no 
longer  form  one  whole.  Besides,  God  would  then  be  a 
body  (a-Mfjia).  But  if  this  cannot  be,  then  it  must  fol- 
low that  in  every  particular  man  God  is  present  with 
him,  and  at  the  same  time  exists  everywhere  as  the 
imiversal  whole."  Plotinus  proceeds  to  extend  this 
view  to  the  whole  trinity  of  the  ideal  world.  "For 
since  there  are  in  the  intelligible  world  three  several 
classes  of  being  in  a  certain  order,  suspended,  as  if  in 
one  sphere  from  one  point,  without  being  separated  by 
intervals  but  all  united  with  one  another,  it  results  that 
where  the  first  class  of  being  is  present,  there  also  the 
second  class  is,  and  also  the  third."  Passing  now  to  the 
soul  as  existing  in  a  human  body  and  so  to  a  certain  ex- 
tent separated  from  the  ideal  world,  Plotinus  enters  into 
a  curious  description  of  such  a  soul  as  belonging  to  both 
worlds  and  illustrating  both  sameness  and  otherness. 
And  here  he  touches  that  key  which  he  is  continually 
striking  in  his  whole  philosophy,  namely,  the  soul's  true 
divinity.  "  As  to  us  men  our  truest  possessions  and  we 
ourselves  belong  to  real  being  (cts  to  ov),  and  naturally 
ascend  to  it,  being  originally  derived  from  it,  and  we 
intuitively  perceive  the  realities  of  that  world,  not  need- 
ing images  or  types  of  them,  but  directly  discerning 
them.     From  which  it  follows  that  we  truly  belong  to 


188  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

that  world  (ta-fiiv  eKctva)."  "  Hence  as  pure  souls  we 
are  one  and  aU  {iravra  apa  ta-yiev  hi).  But  when  we  look 
without  ourselves  to  the  external  world  rather  than  to 
that  ideal  world  whence  we  came,  we  become  ignorant 
of  our  true  condition  as  one  (Iv  ovTci).  But  should  any- 
one be  able  to  turn  himself  in  that  upward  direction, 
either  by  his  own  power  or  through  the  aid  of  Athene, 
he  will  perceive  himself  to  be  God  and  the  aU  (Otov  tc 
Kot  ainov  koX  to  irav  ot/rerat)."  Such  is  the  bold  con- 
sistent pantheism  of  Plotinus.  Some  one  may  inquire 
whether  the  soul's  "  perceiving  itself  to  be  God  "  does 
not  allow  individual  personality.  Of  course  it  does,  for 
Plotinus  is  here  dealing  with  the  soul  in  its  present  state 
of  separation  and  multiplicity.  When,  however,  its  re- 
lease from  the  body  occurs,  all  the  conditions  of  its  sep- 
arated life  will  disappear  and  it  wiU  become  like  God 
himself,  the  one-all  whom  Plotinus  describes  as  neither 
beholding  himself  (ovSc  BXcn-ct  8c  kavTov)^  nor  exercis- 
ing any  intellectual  apprehension,  and  of  whom  nothing 
can  be  predicated  or  known  by  perception  or  intelli- 
gence (En.  VI.  7,  41).  Pantheism  can  go  no  further. 
Mr.  Inge  says:  "Plotinus  is  no  Buddhist."  If  he 
means  that  Plotinus  did  not  hold  to  the  final  absorption 
of  the  soul's  present  conscious  personal  life  at  death 
into  the  super-conscious  Nirvana  of  pantheistic  Bud- 
dhism, how  does  he  interpret  the  above  quoted  pas- 
sages, or  in  fact  the  Enneads  as  a  whole,  for  they  are 
marvelously  consistent  throughout  in  their  fundamental 
premises  ? 


PART  II 

THE  RELATIONS   OF  THE  ETHNIC 

TRINITIES  TO  THE  CHRISTIAN 

TRINITY 


"  The  conversion  of  ecclesiastical  and  confessional  Christianity 
into  historical  Christianity  is  the  work  of  Biblical  science."  — 
Hbnbi-Fbedbbic  Amibl. 

"  The  true  historian  —  he  who  most  sympathetically,  as  well  as 
correctly,  reads  to  the  present  the  lessons  to  be  derived  from  the 
experiences  of  the  past  —  I  hold  to  be  the  only  latter-day  prophet. 
That  man  has  a  message  to  deliver."  —  Charles  Francis  Adadis, 
President  of  the  Massachusetts  EKstorical  Society. 


CHAPTER  I 

EXTERNAL  OR  HISTORICAL  RELATIONS 

The  law  of  historical  evolution  is  universal  and 
knows  no  break  in  its  line  of  continuity.  This  is 
a  first  principle  of  the  scientific  or  historical 
method.  It  holds  true  as  weU  in  the  history  of 
religion,  as  in  that  of  nature  or  of  human  life,  in 
its  practical,  social,  or  intellectual  movements. 
Otherwise  there  could  be  no  history  of  religion. 
Our  previous  studies  have  given  ample  evidence 
that  the  religious  ideas  of  men,  from  the  earliest 
times,  have  moved  along  the  same  line  of  historical 
evolution  that  has  governed  all  other  earthly  things. 
The  consideration  upon  which  we  now  enter  can- 
not therefore  he  treated  as  exceptional.  The  rela- 
tions of  the  Ethnic  trinities  to  the  Christian 
dogma  have  a  plain  historical  foundation.  The 
close  internal  relations  which  wiU  be  considered 
later,  both  of  resemblance  and  difference,  naturally 
suggest  and  involve  a  common  external  back- 
ground and  source  in  history.  Already,  in  our 
survey  of  the  Ethnic  trinities,  indications  of  such 
relationship  have  appeared,  having  their  basis  and 
spring  in  the  common  religious  nature  of  man. 
But  when  we  enter  the  field  of  Christian  origins 


192  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

such  indications  become  the  very  material  and 
substratum  of  religious  history  itself.  No  histori- 
cal breach  occurs,  but  the  old  evolution  moves  on 
in  the  ordinary  historical  channels,  though  provi- 
dential changes  and  reformations  of  a  remarkable 
character  take  place.  Such  changes  and  reforma- 
tions were  not  new  in  the  history  of  religion  at  the 
time  of  Christ's  coming.  Witness  the  Hebrew 
monotheistic  reformation  under  Moses,  the  great 
Persian  religious  movement  in  the  time  of  Zoro- 
aster, the  founding  of  Buddhism,  one  of  the  most 
remarkable  religious  epochs  in  human  annals,  and 
finally,  that  wonderful  period  of  intellectual  and 
moral  iUuminism  in  the  Greek  world,  heralded  by 
Socrates,  and  developed  into  immortal  literary 
form  by  Plato,  by  means  of  which  the  old  super- 
stitious faith  in  an  idolatrous  polytheism  was 
shattered,  and  the  basis  of  a  spiritual  doctrine  of 
God  and  the  soul  laid  in  the  Platonic  idealistic 
philosophy,  and  the  way  thus  providentially  pre- 
pared for  the  reception  of  Christianity.  This  new 
religion  was  a  natural  outgrowth  of  the  earlier 
Mosaic  reformation  and  of  the  Jewish  monotheistic 
faith  which  was  built  upon  it.  At  the  beginning 
of  the  Christian  era,  Judaism  had  become  cor- 
rupt and  the  needed  reformer  appeared  in  Jesus 
of  Nazareth.  No  more  truly  historical  event  has 
ever  occurred  than  the  advent  of  the  Nazarene. 
He  was  of  Jewish  ancestry  and  training,  and  came 
forth  from  his  Galilean  home  filled  with  a  true, 
evangelistic  zeal,  as  a  religious  reformer,  against 


EXTERNAL  OR  HISTORICAL  RELATIONS    193 

the  false  religionists  of  his  day.  His  great  effort 
was  to  revive  the  older  prophetic  teaching,  in  all 
its  living  spiritual  power,  in  place  of  the  dead, 
formal,  and  hypocritical  orthodoxy  of  the  later 
Jewish  Pharisaism.  Further  on  I  shall  dwell  more 
fully  on  the  character  of  his  messianic  mission. 
My  present  object  is  to  mark  the  fact  that  this 
new  religious  epoch  began  in  a  completely  histor- 
ical way  and  was  a  natural  development  out  of 
previous  chapters  of  religious  history.  The  ap- 
pearance of  Jesus  Christ  can  just  as  easily  be 
accounted  for,  from  a  historical  point  of  view,  as 
that  of  Zoroaster  or  Moses  or  Gautama  or  Socra- 
tes. One  divine  providential  purpose  and  move- 
ment, working  through  history  according  to  one 
universal  law  of  good,  though  "  at  sundry  times 
and  in  divers  manners,"  lies  behind  them  all. 

The  mysteries  of  the  divine  selection  and  call- 
ing and  administration  by  which  such  religious 
epochs  are  brought  about  are  closed  to  the  his- 
torian's ken ;  but  the  earthly  human  movements 
themselves,  with  aU  their  religious  results,  are 
wholly  within  the  range  of  historical  research, 
and,  thanks  to  the  new  science  and  history,  are 
being  brought  out  more  and  more  clearly  into  the 
light  of  open  day.  Should  any  one  here  bring 
forward  the  legends  concerning  a  miraculous  birth 
of  Christ,  in  the  opening  chapters  of  Matthew  and 
Luke,  or  the  philosophical  proem  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  concerning  a  divine  incarnation,  the  histor- 
ical reply  must  be  that  such  legendary  and  philo- 


194  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

sopMcal  growths  did  not  first  gather  around  the 
life  of  Christ,  but  were  the  common  accompani- 
ment of  all  remarkable  religious  epochs  and 
characters,  as  our  previous  studies  have  illustrated 
in  the  case  of  Zoroaster,  Buddha,  and  Plato.  Later 
legends  represented  them  aU  as  miraculously  bom 
of  virgin  mothers  through  a  divine  parentage  ;  and 
one  of  them,  Buddha,  became  also  the  medium  of 
a  divine  incarnation.  It  is  needless  to  add  that 
such  ideas  form  the  common  stock  of  all  ancient 
mythologies,  which  show  how  ingrained  they  were 
in  the  earliest  traditions  of  the  race.  For  a  fuller 
critical  account  of  the  Christian  legends  and  the 
way  in  which  they  arose,  I  must  refer  my  readers 
to  my  earlier  volume.  Such  legends  do  not  come 
directly  within  the  historical  field,  but  must  be 
cast  aside  as  misgrowths  of  a  credulous  and  un- 
critical age.  Even  were  they  accepted  as  true,  it 
would  not  affect  the  position  which  the  historical 
student  must  take,  namely,  that  the  evolution  of 
religion  in  its  ordinary  natural  movement  is  able 
to  explain  in  a  strictly  historical  way  the  appear- 
ance of  Christ  and  his  religion. 

I  proceed,  then,  to  trace  the  evidence  of  histor- 
ical relations  between  the  Ethnic  trinities  and  the 
Christian  dogma.  Such  evidence  seems  scarcely 
necessary  when  it  is  considered  that  the  Christian 
religion  has  hitherto  been  regarded  as,  beyond  all 
other  religions,  a  historical  one  and  based  on  his- 
torical facts.  The  traditional  dogmatic  apologists 
of  Christianity  have  made  much  of  the  assured 


EXTERNAL  OR  HISTORICAL  RELATIONS    195 

fact  that  the  chief  articles  of  the  Christian  creeds 
were  actual  historical  events,  while  the  Ethnic 
religious  ideas  were  purely  subjective  delusions 
bom  of  the  mythological  imagination  or  specula- 
tive reason,  which  alike  were  under  the  control  of 
a  fallen  and  depraved  nature.  Frequently  in 
theological  literature  such  matters  as  the  virgin 
miraculous  birth  of  Christ,  his  resurrection  and 
ascension,  his  incarnation  and  his  preexistent  con- 
dition as  the  second  person  of  the  trinity,  and 
even  the  trinity  itself,  are  described  as  historical 
facts  in  contrast  with  similar  legends  and  dogmas 
current  in  the  Ethnic  religions,  which  are  treated 
as  inventions  of  Satan,  or  at  least  as  superstitious 
and  wicked  forms  of  error.  So  recent  and  learned 
a  writer  as  Rev.  J.  K.  lUingworth,  the  Bampton 
lecturer  for  1894,  and  the  author  of  a  work  on 
"Divine  Immanence,"  published  in  1898,  in  a 
chapter  of  the  latter  book,  on  "  The  Incarnation 
and  the  Trinity,"  allows  himself  to  use  such 
language  as  this ;  "  Viewed,  then,  in  the  light 
of  its  history,  the  doctrine  of  the  trinity  is  no 
metaphysical  invention,  like  the  Platonic  'ideas' 
or  the  Aristotelian  'form,'  but  simply  the  ex- 
pression in  philosophical  language  of  what  had 
entered  the  world  as  a  statement  of  fact  —  the 
fact  that  there  is  plurality,  triune  plurality,  in 
GodJ^  "  Accordingly,  it  wiU  be  noticed  that  Hil- 
ary here,  like  Augustine  after  him,  bases  the  doc- 
trine of  the  trinity  on  the  simple  fact,  namely,  the 
baptismal  formula  of  the  Christian  church."     I 


196  THE  ETHNIC  TKINITIES 

confess  that  I  marvel  as  I  read  these  statements  by 
a  prominent  English  divine,  —  not  merely  in  view 
of  the  confusion  of  the  dogmatic  and  the  meta- 
physical and  historical  points  of  view  so  curiously 
revealed,  but  even  more  at  the  apparent  historical 
ignorance  so  naively  displayed.  Yet  Mr.  lUing- 
worth  must  be  aware  that  the  baptismal  trinitarian 
formula  was  not  "  a  simple  fact "  of  original  Chris- 
tianity, but  the  result  of  a  historical  evolution 
from  the  original  norm  which  was  simply  a  baptism 
in  the  name  of  Christ.  The  evolution  from  the 
one  name  to  three  names  accompanied  the  corre- 
sponding evolution  of  monotheism  into  trinitarian- 
ism.  As  to  Mr.  lUingworth's  assertion,  that  the 
trinity  philosophically  expresses  "a  fact,"  and  is 
therefore  "  no  metaphysical  invention,  like  the 
Platonic  '  ideas,' "  I  will  only  ask  the  reader  to 
postpone  judgment  to  the  conclusion  of  this  his- 
torical survey.  But  it  has  not  been  my  object,  in 
referring  to  Mr.  Illingworth's  book,  to  criticise  it, 
so  much  as  to  illustrate  with  it  the  insistence  of 
Christian  apologists  on  the  real  historicity  of  the 
Christian  religion.  Allowing,  then,  its  true  his- 
torical character,  it  must  foUow  that  Christianity 
forms  an  essential  part  of  the  history  of  religion 
as  a  whole.  It  is  true  that  the  counter-assump- 
tion has  usually  been  implied,  namely,  that  all 
other  religions  are  wanting  largely  in  this  note  of 
historicity  or  historical  credibility.  But  recent 
studies  in  comparative  religion  have  demolished 
completely  all  such  assumptions.      What  do  we 


EXTERNAL  OR  HISTORICAL  RELATIONS    197 

mean  when  we  speak  of  a  religion  as  historical? 
Do  we  mean  that  its  doctrines,  as  philosophical 
formulas,  are  historical  events  ?  Such  a  statement 
carries  its  falsity  on  its  very  face.  Philosophical 
formulas  are  ideal  abstractions,  whether  true  op 
false ;  but  abstraxstions  are  creations  of  the  mind, 
not  concrete  historical  events.  The  history  of 
theology,  both  Christian  and  Ethnic,  shows  how 
such  abstract  doctrines  concerning  God  and  man 
and  the  world  have  been  slowly  evolved  as  civili- 
zation has  advanced.  But  to  call  such  notions  of 
God  and  man  and  nature  "facts  of  history"  is 
an  abuse  of  language  which  one  seeks  for  in  vain 
outside  of  theologians  themselves.  History  and 
historical  credibility,  in  the  scientific  meaning  of 
these  terms,  apply  equally  to  all  rehgions.  Bud- 
dhism, Zoroastrianism,  Mohammedanism,  are  as 
truly  historical  religions  as  Christianity.  Every 
religious  idea  that  ever  appeared  in  the  world  is 
historical,  just  so  far,  and  so  far  only,  as  it  has 
succeeded  in  propagating  itself  among  men,  who 
are  the  only  mediums  of  historical  events.  Mor- 
monism,  for  example,  is  having  a  very  concrete 
historical  place  in  any  complete  survey  of  the 
world's  religions,  as  American  history  conclusively 
shows.  It  is  not,  then,  the  truth  or  falsity  of  a 
religion  that  is  the  test  of  its  historicity,  but 
whether  it  entered  human  life,  with  all  its  truth 
or  falsehood,  as  a  hard,  concrete  fact,  and  became 
a  blessing  or  bane  to  human  souls.  Comparative 
religion   as  a   historical  science  deals  only  with 


198  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

matters  of  historical  fact.  A  complete  historical 
survey  of  the  world,  as  far  back  toward  the  origins 
of  mankind  as  research  allows,  reveals  a  multitude 
of  religions  and  of  religious  ideas,  infinitely  diver- 
sified, and  yet  wonderfully  homogeneous  ;  and  it 
has  been  the  task  of  the  historical  student  to  seek, 
by  a  comparative  and  discriminating  analysis, 
the  elements  which  look  toward  community  of 
origin  and  faith  on  the  one  hand,  and  toward  diver- 
gence and  complexity  as  the  result  of  differences 
of  environment  or  of  free  speculative  thought, 
on  the  other.  The  gain  not  only  to  science,  but 
also  to  religion  itself,  of  such  a  comparative  study 
must  be  plain  to  every  candid  mind.  But  such  a 
study,  to  be  fruitful,  must  rest  on  a  purely  scien- 
tific and  historical  basis.  All  religions  alike  must 
be  treated  in  their  purely  historical  aspects,  and 
accepted  as  equally  having  a  place  in  the  provi- 
dential history  of  the  race.  As  a  historical 
religion,  then,  Christianity  must  come  under  the 
same  historic  laws  of  natural,  providential  evo- 
lution as  any  and  every  other.  Almost  all 
the  more  recent  religions  of  the  world  have 
started  from  a  single  historical  founder  whose  new 
conceptions  of  truth  have  been  historically  devel- 
oped into  philosophical  and  dogmatic  systems  of 
one  sort  or  another.  These  different  systems 
have  frequently  affected  each  other  and  led  to 
modifications  which  have  resulted  in  new  lines  of 
theological  evolution.  In  this  respect  it  will  be 
found   that  Christianity  is  no   exception   to   the 


EXTERNAL  OR  HISTORICAL  RELATIONS    199 

general  rule.  In  a  passage  wMch  reveals  a  pro- 
foundly philosophical  and  critical  spirit,  H.  F. 
Amiel  in  his  "  Journal  Intime,"  says  most  truly : 
"  What  we  call  Christianity  is  a  vast  ocean  into 
which  flow  a  number  of  spiritual  currents  of  dis- 
tant and  various  origin,  —  certain  religions,  that 
is  to  say,  of  Asia  and  of  Europe,  the  great  ideas 
of  Greek  wisdom,  and  especially  those  of  Plato- 
nism.  Neither  its  doctrine  nor  its  morality,  as  they 
have  been  historically  developed,  are  new  or  spon- 
taneous. What  is  original  and  specific  in  Chris- 
tianity is  Jesus,  —  the  religious  consciousness  of 
Jesus.^^  It  has  been  the  traditional  dogmatic  view 
that  Christianity,  with  all  its  accretion  of  dogmas 
and  rites  gathered  in  the  course  of  centuries,  was 
a  new  religion  throughout,  introduced  into  the 
world  by  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  who  broke  the  con- 
tinuity of  history  and  of  historical  religions 
through  a  divine  incarnation  which  miraculously 
transcended  aU  ordinary  natural  laws  and  became 
the  witness  and  seal  of  a  direct  and  perfect  reve- 
lation of  God,  who  in  Jesus  himself  was  thus  ac- 
tually "  manifest  in  the  flesh  "  to  men.  This  view 
made  the  person  of  Jesus  the  very  substance  of 
truth.  The  imknown  author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel 
makes  Christ  say  :  "  /  am  the  truth."  Of  course, 
then,  Christ's  teachings,  in  contrast  with  those  of 
aU  other  religious  prophets  and  sages,  were  of 
heavenly  origin,  and  hence  infallible '  and  perfect. 
Christianity  thus  became  differentiated  from  aU 
other  religions  as  the  one  divine  gospel,  with  the 


200  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

seal  upon  it  of  God  himseK,  while  those  religions 
were  of  human  fabrication,  —  the  work  of  men 
who  "  did  not  like  to  retain  God  in  their  know- 
ledge." Christianity,  therefore,  was  the  only  true 
religion,  and  other  religions  were  false.  How  en- 
tirely without  historical  foundation  this  whole  view 
is  I  need  not  here  do  more  than  simply  declare. 
Every  page  of  history  contributes  its  quota  of  evi- 
dence in  its  refutation.  That  it  should  have  been 
accepted  as  true,  unhistorical  as  it  was,  in  the 
Dark  Ages,  when  civilization  almost  expired,  and 
the  Christian  religion  itseK  became  a  system  of 
degrading  superstitions,  is  not  surprising.  How 
could  it  have  been  otherwise,  when  earth  and  air 
were  filled  with  supernatural  beings  whose  diabol- 
ical nature  and  power  were  mostly  exercised  in 
tormenting  and  terrifying  poor  humanity,  and  God 
had,  to  human  view,  almost  left  his  own  world. 
It  was  in  such  an  age  that  Christianity  completed 
its  dogmatic  and  ritualistic  forms,  —  a  time  of  in- 
tellectual and  moral  gloom,  when  history  became 
a  "  lost  art "  and  legend  and  fable  filled  the 
whole  horizon  of  human  life  with  delusion  and 
fear.  The  real  surprise  begins  when,  in  the 
closing  days  of  the  nineteenth  century,  under  the 
light  of  a  new  science  and  history  which  has  so 
thoroughly  dispelled  the  ghosts  of  past  ignorance, 
men  with  professed  historical  learning  could  uphold 
so  groundless  an  assumption. 

Going  back  now  to  the  historical  origin  of  Chris- 
tianity in  the  life  and  teachings  of  its  founder,  we 


EXTERNAL  OR  HISTORICAL  RELATIONS    201 

ask :  What  was  its  historical  starting-point  ?  In 
other  words,  wherein  did  Jesus  of  Nazareth  show 
himseK  a  religious  genius  and  leader,  and  what 
was  the  new  truth  which  became  the  seed  of  a  new 
religion  ?  Certainly  the  answer  is  not  to  be  found 
in  any  new  dogmas  which  he  gave  to  the  world. 
Christ's  teaching  was  ethical  rather  than  dogmatic. 
So  far  as  he  had  what  we  may  call  a  theology,  it 
was  derived  from  his  Jewish  ancestors  and  from 
their  Scriptures.  His  doctrine  of  God,  man,  sin, 
a  future  life,  heaven,  hell,  was  not  original  at  all, 
but  was  a  part  of  the  accepted  creed  of  his  own 
day.  As  to  those  later  Christian  dogmas,  such  as 
incarnation,  miraculous  virgin  birth,  trinity,  etc., 
which  were  the  result  of  a  slow  evolution  and  can- 
not be  attributed  to  Christ  himself,  should  it  be 
claimed  that  as  Christian  doctrines  they  originated 
in  Christ's  own  teachings,  and  should  the  claim  be 
allowed,  even  then  history  shows  that  such  dogmas 
were  not  original  with  Christianity.  Miraculous 
births  and  divine  incarnations  were  common  ap- 
pendages of  new  religious  movements  ages  before 
Christ's  day.  As  to  the  trinity,  though  Mr.  lUing- 
worth  claims  that  "  it  was  implicit  in  the  Chris- 
tian creed,"  and  "  was  not  borrowed  from  Plato  or 
any  other  Ethnic  source "  (Bampton  Lectures, 
1894,  p.  66^,  I  can  only  express  my  surprise 
that  any  scholar  in  these  days  should  dare  to  make 
such  a  claim,  and  refer  my  readers,  for  the  abun- 
dant evidence  in  disproof,  to  my  "  Critical  History 
of  the  Evolution  of  Trinitarianism  "  and  to  the 


202  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

fuller  testimony  of  the  book  in  hand.  I  will 
simply  add  that  if  there  is  one  historical  fact  that 
is  more  assured  to  me  than  any  other  in  the  his- 
tory of  Christian  theology,  it  is  the  fact  that  the 
Christian  trinitarian  dogma,  with  its  cardinal 
logos  doctrine,  is  the  direct  lineal  descendant  of 
the  Platonic  dualistic  idealism. 

Nor,  again,  does  the  newness  of  the  gospel  con- 
sist in  its  philosophy.  To  caU  the  "  good  news  " 
which  Christ  proclaimed  to  men  a  new  philosophy 
is  a  gross  misrepresentation  of  the  whole  spirit 
and  method  of  the  great  teacher.  Christ  had  not 
been  educated  in  any  philosophical  school,  whether 
Jewish  or  Greek.  There  is  no  evidence  that  he 
had  any  acquaintance  with  the  metaphysical  ideas 
which  were  floating  in  the  intellectual  atmosphere 
of  his  time.  Not  even  the  rabbinical  thought  of 
scholastic  Judaism  seems  to  have  affected  him  any 
further  than  to  draw  forth  his  aversion  and  antag- 
onism. He  did  not  teach  "  as  the  scribes.*'  His 
whole  spirit  and  method  were  different  from  theirs. 
While  they  were  under  the  yoke  of  a  theological 
tradition,  he  spoke  out  of  the  free  spontaneous  in- 
tuitions of  his  own  moral  nature.  Even  less,  if 
possible,  was  he  affected  by  the  various  Greek 
philosophical  schools  that  were  beginning  to  break 
down  the  partition  walls  of  Jewish  isolation. 
Neither  Palestinian  Sadduceeism  nor  Alexandrian 
Philonism  ever  disturbed  with  their  skeptical  or 
mystical  clouds  the  intellectual  serenity  of  his 
Galilean  soul.     No  wonder  that  dwellers  in  Jeru- 


EXTERNAL  OR  HISTORICAL  RELATIONS    203 

salem  should  have  "  marveled  "  as  they  listened  to 
a  gospel  so  strange  to  their  ears,  and  should  have 
said :  "  How  knoweth  this  man  letters,  having 
never  learned?"  And  Christ's  reported  answer 
shows  this  at  least,  that  he  regarded  his  gospel 
not  as  the  product  of  education  or  philosophy,  but 
as  the  immediate  offspring  of  his  own  moral  rela- 
tion with  God :  "  My  teaching  is  not  mine  but  his 
that  sent  me."  It  is  true  that  Christianity  was 
afterwards  developed  into  a  philosophical  creed,  as 
is  true  of  all  religious  ideas,  but  this  historical 
process  cannot  be  traced  to  its  founder.  Paul,  as 
we  shall  see,  was  the  historical  bridge  between  the 
"  good  news  "  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  and  the  specu- 
lative philosophy  of  the  Nicene  Creed. 

Nor,  again,  was  the  Christianity  of  Christ  a 
new  system  of  ethics.  Much  has  been  made  of 
this  point  in  the  traditional  apologies  and  polemics. 
But  here,  also,  historical  comparative  investigation 
has  disillusioned  the  whole  religious  field.  If 
purity  of  ethics  was  to  be  the  great  test  of  reli- 
gious systems,  there  are  other  religions  that  would 
not  suffer  greatly  when  compared  with  Christian- 
ity. Innumerable  passages  can  be  quoted  from 
the  reputed  sayings  of  Zoroaster,  Confucius,  Gau- 
tama, Socrates,  and  Plato,  inspired  with  a  purity 
and  sweetness  of  moral  temper  that  strongly  re- 
mind one  of  Christ's  own  teaching.  Surely  human 
ethics  reaches  its  highest  form  in  the  doctrine  of 
universal  love  and  benevolence,  or  in  the  kindred 
doctrine  that  the  great  aim  and  end  of  moral  life 


fl04  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

should  be  to  become  like  God.  Yet  the  former 
doctrine  is  written  on  every  page  of  Buddhistic 
literature,  while  the  latter  doctrine  was  emphasized 
by  Plato  in  words  that  stir  every  ethical  sentiment 
of  the  soul.  Christ's  "  new  commandment  "  that 
men  should  love  one  another  was  not  "  new  "  in 
history,  though  he  by  his  own  life  and  teaching 
gave  it  a  new  meaning  and  power.  Righteousness 
is  the  central  ethical  word  of  the  Bible,  but  where 
can  a  purer  or  more  searching  delineation  of  it  be 
found  than  in  the  second  book  of  Plato's  Repub- 
lic ?  To  devote  one's  whole  life,  even  to  its  end,  in 
a  death  of  martyrdom,  to  the  work  of  contributing 
in  the  highest  possible  degree  to  the  moral  welfare 
and  progress  of  one's  feUow-men,  is  surely  the 
highest  ideal  of  a  moral  life ;  but  where  can  a 
more  touching  example  of  such  a  life  be  found 
than  that  of  Socrates  as  given  in  the  Memora- 
bilia of  Xenophon  and  in  the  Phaedo  of  his  dis- 
ciple Plato  ?  Does  the  life  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth, 
devoted  to  these  same  high  moral  ends,  ecHpse  all 
others,  the  secret  of  its  superior  attraction  does 
not  lie  in  a  new  ethics,  but  elsewhere.  What  is 
this  secret  ?  What  is  it  that  is  original  and 
unique  in  the  beginnings  of  Christianity  ?  There 
is  but  one  answer,  —  and  he  that  runs  may  read 
it,  —  when,  dismissing  all  traditional  conceptions, 
one  holds  up  directly  before  his  eyes  the  actual 
historical  Hfe  of  Christ  and  catches  the  spirit  that 
moved  it  as  a  principle  and  spur  of  moral  action. 
Surely  it  was,  as  Amiel   wrote,  Christ's  "moral 


EXTERNAL  OR  HISTORICAL  RELATIONS    205 

consciousness,"  full  to  overflowing  of  his  sense  of 
relationship  to  God  as  his  Father,  and  to  man  as 
his  brother,  involving  a  double  mission  of  obe- 
dience to  God  in  doing  the  work  given  him  to  do, 
and  of  ministry  to  men  who  were  equally  the  chil- 
dren of  the  common  Father  in  heaven  and  the 
common  heirs  of  his  love  and  grace.  Here  is  the 
headspring  of  the  gospel  Christ  preached.  The 
parable  of  the  prodigal  son  sums  it  all  up  in  one 
wonderful  story.  This  was  the  keynote  of  Christ's 
messiahship.  There  was  no  theology,  or  philosophy, 
or  ethics  in  it,  but  simply  a  new  exposition  of  the 
moral  character  of  God  and  of  man's  moral  rela^ 
tionship  to  him,  —  an  exposition  that  was  born  in 
the  religious  consciousness  of  Jesus  himself  and 
filled  his  life  more  and  more  blessedly  with  its 
precious  revelations.  These  revelations,  brought 
to  light  in  his  own  moral  experience,  were  the  sub- 
stance of  his  teaching.  And  what  was  the  doc- 
trine that  formed  its  centre  and  circumference  ? 
Simply  this  :  God's  moral  character  is  summed  up 
in  love,  and  as  such  is  revealed  in  all  ways  to  all 
his  moral  creatures :  and  hence  the  highest  form  of 
morality  in  man,  who  was  made  in  God's  moral 
image,  is  to  grow  in  the  divine  likeness,  so  that 
the  whole  moral  law  of  the  gospel  is  summed  up 
in  the  "new  commandment,"  "Love  one  another." 
Love,  then,  in  Christ's  teaching,  became  the  es- 
sence of  religion.  For  religion,  as  its  very  name 
indicates,  is  a  binding  and  unifying  principle. 
Hence  its  essential  element  cannot  be  dogma  or 


206  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

philosophy,  which  separate  into  sects  and  schools. 
But  love,  on  the  contrary,  is  the  great  harmonizing 
force  in  the  moral  kingdom,  and  by  it  Christ's 
words  are  fulfilled  "  that  they  all  may  be  one." 
Moreover,  love  has  in  it  a  moral  principle  which 
becomes  a  passion  and  inspiration  for  action.  The 
author  of  "  Ecce  Homo  "  has  well  described  it  as 
"  the  enthusiasm  of  humanity."  It  is  not  a  "  dry 
light  "  like  a  metaphysical  or  ethical  formula,  but 
a  flame  of  fire,  the  fire  of  a  moral  nature  all  alive 
with  a  moral  consciousness  that  is  in  constant  liv- 
ing conununion  with  God,  and  longs  to  pour  out 
its  ardent  life  in  a  loving  ministry  to  needy  hu- 
man souls.  Here,  then,  we  stand  at  the  fountain 
head  of  the  Christian  religion,  and  can  mark  the 
true  beginnings  of  its  history. 

Jesus  was  a  Jew  of  Semitic  race.  His  teaching 
was  in  the  Hebrew- Aramaic  language,  a  dialect 
kindred  with  the  Phoenician  and  Arabic.  It  is 
true  that  a  few  disciples  seem  to  have  been 
gathered  out  of  the  Greek  and  Roman  world  into 
which  Judaea  had  been  politically  incorporated; 
but  during  the  life  of  the  founder  the  proclama- 
tion of  his  gospel  was  confined  to  Aramaic  Pales- 
tine, so  that  Christianity  was,  at  the  outset,  an 
Aramaic  Semitic  religion.  The  original  apostles 
were  all  Jews  and  of  Aramaic  speech.  It  is  an 
interesting  though  not  a  practical  question,  what 
the  fortunes  of  Christianity  would  have  been  had 
not  the  dispersion  of  the  Jews  in  other  coun- 
tries, and  especially  throughout  the  Graeco-Roman 


EXTERNAL  OR  HISTORICAL  RELATIONS    207 

Empire,  brought  large  numbers  of  them  into 
close  acquaintance  with  the  Greek  language  and 
culture.  Had  Judaea  remained  closed  to  outside 
influences  and  been  kept  in  political  and  linguistic 
isolation,  what  human  probability  that  the  religious 
reformation  attempted  by  Christ  would  have  suc- 
ceeded in  Palestine  or  been  carried  forth  into  the 
Greek  world  ?  The  Jews,  we  know,  rejected  him 
en  masse,  and  no  avenue  would  have  been  opened 
for  the  preaching  of  his  gospel  to  the  Gentiles. 
Christ's  religious  movement  might  have  been 
stifled  in  its  very  birth.  Here  are  to  be  seen  two 
of  the  "  divers  ways  "  in  which  the  divine  provi- 
dence has  worked  in  history  for  the  evolution  of 
good  to  mankind :  first,  in  the  wide  dispersion  of 
the  Jews  among  the  Gentiles,  and  the  breakdown 
of  the  political  barriers  which  made  them  for  ages 
"  a  peculiar  people  ;  "  and  secondly,  in  the  remark- 
able training  of  Paul,  who,  though  a  Jew,  was 
born  and  educated  in  a  Greek  city,  Tarsus,  and 
thus  was  made  acquainted  with  both  the  Hebrew- 
Aramaic  and  Greek  languages,  and  also  with 
Jewish-Rabbinic  and  Greek  philosophical  ideas. 
Without  Paul,  we  may  say  that  the  whole  history 
of  Christianity  would  have  taken  an  entirely 
different  shape.  So  much  sometimes  seems  to 
hang  on  a  single  individual.  So  far  as  history 
can  speak,  no  other  individual  appeared  in  his  day 
that  could  have  taken  his  place,  or  have  done  the 
unique  work  that  he  did.  Never  perhaps  was  the 
hand  of  providence  more  conspicuously  revealed  in 


208  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

human  affairs.  For  Paul,  as  has  already  been 
said,  was  the  great  historical  bridge  from  a  pro- 
vincial Aramaic  religious  movement  to  its  oecumen- 
ical extension  over  the  world.  If  Christ  was  the 
true  founder  of  the  Christian  religion,  Paul  was  as 
truly  the  founder  of  the  Grseco-Roman  Christian- 
ity. He  gave  the  original  Semitic  gospel  of 
Jesus  its  new  philosophical  setting  which  prepared 
the  way  for  its  entrance  into  Aryan  thought  and 
faith.  This  is  well  illustrated  by  the  term  fna-LTrjq 
(mediator),  which  is  the  central  keynote  of  Paul's 
theology  and  which  he  plainly  borrowed  from  the 
Greek  Platonic  Philonism.i  It  was  through  Paul, 
the  "Apostle  to  the  Gentiles,"  that  Christian 
churches  were  planted  in  the  non-Semitic  Aryan 
world,  —  in  other  words,  among  a  people  who 
spoke  Greek  (or  Latin)  instead  of  Aramaic. 
This  significant  change  is  marked  by  the  fact  that 
the  New  Testament  has  come  down  to  us  in  Greek 
rather  than  in  Aramaic-Hebrew.  The  tradition, 
whether  historical  or  not,  that  the  gospel,  after- 
wards ascribed  to  Matthew,  was  originally  written 
in  Hebrew,  has  a  historical  basis  in  this  fact. 
The  full  significance  of  such  a  transfer  cannot  be 
realized  until  it  is  understood  that  the  centre  of 
political  power  and  the  great  historical  currents 
which  were  chiefly  to  mould  the  world's  future  had 
already  passed  into  the  hands  of  the  European 
Aryan  people.     The  question  whether  the  Semite 

1  See  note  at  the  end  of  this  chapter  for  reply  to  Dr.  Lyman 
Abbott's  criticism  on  my  view  of  Paul. 


EXTERNAL  OR  HISTORICAL  RELATIONS    209 

or  the  Aryan  should  rule  and  direct  the  civiliza- 
tion of  the  human  race  was  settled  in  the  war 
between  Rome  and  Carthage,  when  the  world's 
fortunes  for  the  moment  seemed  to  hang  in  the 
balance  as  swayed  by  the  military  genius  of  one 
man,  "  the  wily  Hannibal."  The  battle  of  Zama 
settled  the  question  in  favor  of  the  Aryan. 
Even  Mohammed,  with  his  Semitic  Arabian  reli- 
gious reaction,  was  not  able  to  reverse  the  issue. 
And  as  the  political  and  social  character  of  man- 
kind was  to  be  moulded  through  the  Aryan  mind, 
so  was  it  to  be  with  its  religion.  Paul  was  him- 
self a  true  Semitic  Jew,  but  he  was  born  in  a 
Greek  city  and  received  an  Aryan  education,  and 
thus  was  fitted  to  translate  a  Semitic  gospel  into 
Aryan  forms  of  thought  and  speech.  It  is  not 
needful  to  dwell  at  length  on  the  historical  con- 
sequences of  Paul's  work.  What  is  here  to  be 
kept  in  view  is  the  fact  that  this  transfer  of 
Christ's  religion  from  Aramaic  Palestinian  soil  to 
the  Aryan  Grseco-Roman  world  was  a  radical  and 
critical  point  in  its  whole  history,  and  further  that 
it  was  brought  about  whoUy  by  ordinary  historical 
processes.  Neander  has  introduced  his  "  History 
of  the  Christian  Religion  "  with  an  account  of 
what  he  caUs  "  the  preparations  for  Christianity." 
No  historical  religion  was  ever  more  wonderfully 
prepared  for  by  thoroughly  historical  providential 
movements  than  Christianity  itseK.  And  an  ap- 
peal to  such  visible  historical  preparation  is  the 
true  basis  of  every  Christian  apology. 


210  THE   ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

With  the  entrance  of  Christianity  into  the 
Greek  world,  a  new  chapter  in  its  history  begins. 
It  became  the  religion  of  Greek  communities,  and 
at  once  was  modified  by  Greek  social,  political, 
and  philosophical  ideas  and  usages.  It  is  in- 
deed difficult  to  realize  how  much  is  involved  in 
the  passage  of  a  religion  from  one  race  and 
language  to  another  wholly  distinct  race  and 
language.  Mr.  Flinders-Petrie,  in  a  course  of 
lectures  on  "  Keligion  in  Ancient  Egypt,"  seeking 
to  place  his  English  hearers  at  the  right  point  of 
view,  well  said :  "  We  must  feel  that  the  greater 
part  of  mankind  has  had  systems  of  language 
which  would  be  wholly  incapable  of  expressing  our 
ideas."  The  reverse,  of  course,  is  equally  true. 
The  differences  between  the  Semitic  and  Aryan 
languages  are  radical.  They  belong  to  two  com- 
pletely distinct  types  of  speech.  The  very  roots 
and  forms  of  inflection  are  wholly  diverse.  Not 
only  so,  the  histories  of  the  Semitic  and  Aryan 
peoples  have  been  on  lines  as  diverse  as  their 
languages.  Two  different  types  of  civilization 
were  developed  by  them.  Here  is  the  historical 
reason  why  the  Semitic  Phoenician  Carthaginians 
could  never  amalgamate  with  the  Aryan  Greeks 
or  Romans  when  they  came  into  contact.  One  or 
the  other  must  yield.  In  fact,  the  Aryan  race 
and  language  showed  itself  the  stronger,  both  in 
war  and  in  peace.  Equally  was  the  Aryan  type 
of  religious  thought  and  faith  to  prevail  in  religion. 
How   could   it   be  otherwise?     Religious   beliefs 


EXTERNAL  OR  HISTORICAL  RELATIONS    211 

have  their  basis  in  the  ideas  of  men  concerning  the 
cardinal  questions  of  philosophy,  namely,  the  views 
held  concerning  the  world  and  man  and  God. 
When  Christianity  entered  the  sphere  of  the 
Greek  language  and  culture,  its  very  philosophy 
suffered  a  radical  change.  Paul  himself  caught  his 
new  philosophical  keynote  of  a  mediator,  as  has 
been  already  explained,  from  his  acquaintance  with 
the  Greek  language  and  thought.  His  immediate 
Christian  theological  successors,  Justin  Martyr, 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  Origen,  were  steeped  in 
the  Platonic  Greek  philosophy  and  drew  from  it 
the  metaphysical  groundwork  of  their  Christian 
theology.  Justin  Martyr  who  was,  after  Paul,  the 
true  founder  of  that  Greek  type  of  Christianity 
which  ultimately  prevailed  over  the  original  Se- 
mitic Ebionitic  type,  was  a  Platonic  philosopher 
before  he  became  a  Christian,  and  it  is  to  him 
that  we  owe,  so  far  as  history  sheds  light  on  the 
subject,  the  introduction  of  the  logos  doctrine 
into  the  dogma  of  the  trinity.  The  effect  of  this 
new  Greek  logos  mediation  idea  was  radical.  The 
whole  Jewish  conception  of  God  and  his  relations 
to  men  which  Christ  as  a  Jew  had  retained  in  his 
new  gospel  was  modified,  and  the  Ethnic  Greek 
conception  which  rested  on  the  need  of  a  meta- 
physical divine  mediation  principle  supplanted  it. 
Thus  Christianity  from  the  middle  of  the  second 
century  passed  through  a  complete  metamorphosis 
and  became  Aryan  to  the  core.  What  saved  to  it 
a  Semitic  leaven  which  remained  indeed  vital  in 


212  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

many  ways,  was  the  fact  that  the  Jewish  Old 
Testament  writings,  on  which  Christ  had  built  his 
religious  reform,  became  the  Christian  Bible,  and 
has  remained  an  essential  part  of  the  sacred  books 
of  Christianity  down  to  the  present  day.  The 
part,  however,  that  was  played  by  the  Old  Tes- 
tament in  early  Christian  dogmatics  was  com- 
paratively small.  Thanks  to  Paul's  Greek  educa- 
tion and  to  the  Hellenic  character  of  the  early 
Fathers  from  Justin  Martyr  to  Origen,  Christian 
theology  became  thoroughly  HeUenized.  In  the 
course  of  a  century  or  more,  the  Semitic  religion 
of  Christ  was  evolved  into  a  completely  Aryan 
form.  The  fuU  account  of  this  historical  move- 
ment may  be  found  in  my  previous  book.  It  is 
only  needful  here  to  remind  those  who  have  read  it 
that  the  central  dogma  on  which  everything  else 
hangs  is  that  of  Christ  as  the  true  logos  of  God 
and  the  divine  mediator  between  God  and  man ; 
and  that  this  dogma  had  its  historical  origin  in 
Greek  philosophy. 

1  have  thus  made  sufficiently  clear,  I  trust,  the 
fact  of  a  close  historical  connection  between  the 
Ethnic  religions  and  Christianity.  Christ's  gospel 
sprang  out  of  Judaism,  and  forms  a  special  chap- 
ter in  the  history  of  the  Old  Testament  Jewish 
religion.  Judaism  in  its  turn  had  its  historical 
beginnings  in  the  Ethnic  Babylonian-Chaldaic  re- 
ligion of  the  ancestors  of  Abraham,  who  emigrated 
from  "Ur  of  the  Chaldees."  With  Paul  a  new 
chapter  begins  when  the  Judean  gospel  was  trans- 


EXTERNAL  OR  HISTORICAL  RELATIONS    213 

lated  into  the  Greek  language  and  thought,  and 
its  further  history  is  inextricably  mixed  with  that 
of  Ethnic-Greek  religious  ideas,  at  first  in  the  way 
of  opposition,  and  later  in  that  of  combination 
and  absorption.  No  Christian  theologian  of  the 
second,  third,  or  fourth  centuries  can  be  under- 
stood without  a  full  acquaintance  with  the  Ethnic 
philosophy  of  his  day.  This  is  especially  true  of 
those  who  laid  the  foundations  of  the  leading 
Christian  philosophical  schools,  and  helped  to 
frame  the  creeds  which  became  orthodox  and 
oecumenical.  Justin  Martyr,  Origen,  Athanasius, 
Augustine,  were  first  of  all  philosophical  thinkers, 
building  their  theories  of  God,  man,  and  nature 
on  a  philosophy  which  they  borrowed  from  Plato, 
Aristotle,  Plotinus,  and  the  Stoics.  We  are  thus 
prepared  to  proceed  to  a  consideration  of  the  in- 
ternal relations  between  the  Ethnic  trinities  and 
the  Christian  trinitarian  dogma. 

Note  (see  p.  208).  —  A  review  of  "  The  Evolution  of 
Trinitarianism  '*  in  "  The  Outlook "  (December  15, 
1900),  presumably  by  Dr.  Abbott,  takes  issue  with  my 
view  of  Paul's  mediational  Christology.  Dr.  Abbott 
declares  that  I  make  Paul  an  Arian.  This  can  be 
true  only  in  the  sense  that  all  the  early  Fathers  were 
Arians.  The  mediation  theory  Hes  at  the  very  founda- 
tion of  the  whole  Greek  theology.  It  was  drawn, 
as  we  have  seen,  from  Plato  through  Philo,  and  was 
fuUy  developed  in  the  logos  doctrine.  Athanasius  held 
it  as  strongly  as  Arius ;  both  were  equally  dualistic. 
The  question  between  them  was  not  whether  Christ 


214  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

was  a  mediator  between  God  and  man,  but  just  how 
much  was  metaphysically  involved  in  such  a  function. 
Both  of  them  held  to  the  subordinationism  of  Origen, 
but  while  Athanasius  was  disposed  to  lessen  it  to  a 
minimum,  Arius  reacted  toward  the  opposite  pole,  and 
thus  was  led  to  declare  that  Christ  was  not  derived 
from  God  by  eternal  generation,  as  Athanasius  held, 
but  was  a  creature  of  God,  with  a  beginning  in  time, 
though  the  highest  of  all  creatures  and  the  instrument 
of  their  creation,  and  hence  capable  of  assuming  medi- 
ational  functions.  This  is  what  is  known  in  church 
history  as  Arianism.  To  confound  Paul's  mediation 
ideas  with  the  fourth  century  doctrine  of  Arius  argues 
a  strange  want  of  acquaintance  with  the  history  of 
the  evolution  of  the  Greek  trinitarianism.  Whatever 
Paul's  ideas  were  concerning  the  metaphysical  charac- 
ter of  the  relation  of  Christ  to  God,  he  gives  no  clear 
theological  statement  of  them.  Certainly  he  was  no 
Arian.  The  time  had  not  come  for  such  a  step.  It 
took  three  centuries  to  develop  it.  Paul  was  a  prac- 
tical, not  a  speculative  thinker.  He  laid  hold  of  the 
dualistic  mediation  theory  as  a  good  practical  basis  for 
his  faith  in  Christ  as  the  true  Saviour  of  men.  Whether 
he  regarded  Christ  as  metaphysically  more  than  a 
man  is  doubted  by  such  scholars  as  Pfleiderer,  and 
certainly  several  passages  in  his  Epistles  look  strongly 
that  way.  I  refer  especially  to  1  Timothy  ii.  5  and  1 
Corinthians  xv.  47.  But  other  passages,  such  as  Phil, 
ii.  5  and  1  Corinthians  xi.  3,  seem  to  me  to  show  con- 
clusively that  Paul  regarded  Christ  as  superhuman 
and  of  heavenly  origin,  though  it  is  equally  plain  that 
he  never  thought  of  making  him  identical  with  God 
himself,  or  in  any  sense  an  Absolute  Being.  Thus  one 
class  of  passages  serves  to  correct  and  limit  the  inter- 
pretation to  be  given  to  another  class. 


EXTERNAL  OR  HISTORICAL  RELATIONS    215 

Dr.  Abbott  criticises  my  use  of  1  Timothy  ii.  5, 
because  of  its  doubtful  genuineness.  But  if  1  Timothy 
ought  not  to  be  quoted  in  behalf  of  my  view  of  Paul's 
Christology,  what  right  has  Dr.  Abbott  to  base  his  own 
view  on  another  passage  in  the  next  chapter  of  the 
same  Epistle  ?  He  defends  his  use  of  it  by  declaring 
that  it  "  has  been  rightly  accepted  as  a  true  summary 
of  the  Apostolic  doctrine,"  but  such  a  defense  would 
be  equally  good  for  my  use  of  the  famous  passage 
"There  is  one  God,  one  mediator  between  God  and 
man,  himself  man,  Christ  Jesus :  "  for  it  gave  the  key- 
note to  the  later  Greek  Christology,  though,  as  I  have 
shown,  the  term  /Aco-tn/?  (mediator)  gave  way  to 
another  Philonic  word,  logos,  which  became  the  com- 
mon term  for  Christ  as  mediator.  Thus  Athanasius 
employs  the  term  fxecrirrjs  but  once,  so  far  as  I  am 
aware,  while  the  term  logos  is  sprinkled  all  over  his 
writings.  But  I  am  not  so  ready  to  give  up  the  genu- 
ineness of  the  Pastoral  Epistles  as  Dr.  Abbott  seems 
to  be.  No  letters  of  Paul  are  more  full  of  internal 
evidence  of  Pauline  authorship.  The  Pauline  flavor  runs 
all  through  them.  Take  the  passage,  "  For  I  am  ready 
to  be  offered,"  etc. ;  if  Paul  did  not  write  it,  my  faith 
in  the  authenticity  of  all  the  so-caUed  Pauline  Epistles 
would  be  greatly  shaken.  I  am  quite  ready  to  believe 
that  these  Epistles  have  suffered  interpolation  along 
with  other  New  Testament  writings ;  but  there  is  not 
the  slightest  evidence  of  the  interpolation  of  1  Tim. 
ii.  5.  In  fact,  it  is  to  my  mind  a  decisive  proof  of  its 
genuineness  that  it  harmonizes  so  completely  with 
Paul's  other  Epistles  which  are  full  of  the  mediation 
view,  with  its  natural  corollaries  of  subordination  and 
personal  distinction.  And  this,  I  take  it,  is  the  real 
point  of  Dr.  Abbott's  objection  to  my  interpretation  of 
Paul's  Christology.    He  holds  that  "  The  New  Trmita- 


216  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES. 

rianism  "  was  Paul's  trinitarianism,  namely,  that  Christ 
was  the  manifestation  of  God  in  the  flesh,  in  the  sense 
that  God's  real  being  and  divinity  was  incarnated  in 
Jesus  of  Nazareth,  so  that,  so  far  as  Christ  was  divine, 
his  divinity  was  identical  with  God's  divinity.  Hence 
his  dislike  of  the  fxea-iTT)^  (mediator)  doctrine,  which  as 
a  Platonic  dualistic  theory  has  always  in  Greek  trini- 
tarianism involved  a  metaphysical  subordination  of 
the  second  person  to  the  first  person.  Dr.  Abbott 
thinks  that  on  this  point  I  "  misunderstand  Paul  and 
also  the  modern  trinitarianism,"  and  he  believes  that 
*^  orthodoxy  has  returned,  after  traveling  a  long  circuit, 
to  the  spirit  of  Paul."  This  may  be  so,  but  surely  not 
in  Dr.  Abbott's  way.  To  make  Paul  square  with 
"  Modern  Trinitarianism  "  one  must  do  exegetical  vio- 
lence to  the  whole  drift  of  Paul's  teachings.  Take  the 
famous  Kenotic  passage  in  Phil.  ii.  To  make  it  har- 
monize with  Dr.  Abbott's  view,  one  must  distort  it 
from  end  to  end.  Its  plain  natural  meaning  is  that 
Christ,  as  subordinate  to  God,  though  of  divine  nature, 
obediently  accepted  the  mediatorial  function  and  be- 
came incarnate,  and  as  man  humbled  himself  to  die  on 
the  cross ;  and  that  on  this  account  God  "  highly 
exalted  him,^'  etc.  This  is  the  historical  Christian 
doctrine  of  mediatorship  as  held  by  all  the  early  Greek 
Fathers,  including  Arius  and  Athanasius.  To  read  into 
this  passage  the  Augustinian  Sabellianism  or  the 
latest  "  New  Trinitarianism  "  would  require  a  heroic 
exercise  of  exegetical  dexterity.  Let  me  suggest  one 
passage  more  for  Dr.  Abbott's  consideration,  which 
sheds  an  interesting  sidelight  on  this  subject,  —  1  Corin- 
thians xi.  3  :  "  The  head  of  every  man  is  Christ,  and 
the  head  of  the  woman  is  the  man,  and  the  head  of 
Christ  is  God."  The  key  to  the  understanding  of  this 
is  Paul's  view  of  woman  as  inferior  in  nature  to  man 


EXTERNAL  O^  HISTORICAL  RELATIONS    217 

and  therefore  subject  to  him.  This  is  made  clear  by 
what  follows.  Hence  Paul's  four  orders  of  being: 
woman,  man,  Christ,  God.  As  man  is  superior  to 
woman,  so  Christ  is  superior  in  nature  to  man,  and 
God  superior  to  Christ.  The  logic  here  is  perfectly 
plain  and  complete,  and  it  lets  us  into  the  very  heart  of 
Paul's  Christology. 

Leaving  out  of  view  the  Philonic  ftccrmy?  in  1  Tim.  ii. 
5,  Paul's  mediation  doctrine  stands  out  clearly  in  his 
teaching.  In  fact,  the  evidence  of  a  Greek  Philonic 
influence  in  the  Epistles  that  are  universally  accepted 
as  genuine  is  so  strong  that  the  genuineness  of  the 
Pastoral  Epistles  is  amply  sustained  in  their  use  of 
the  term  ftccrm/s.  Paul  uses  other  Philonic  expressions 
besides  this  one.  For  example,  1  Corinthians  xv.  47, 
"  The  first  man  is  of  the  earth  earthy ;  the  second  man 
is  of  heaven  "  is  a  direct  reminiscence  of  Philo,  who 
says  :  "  There  are  two  kinds  of  men.  The  one  man  is 
heavenly,  the  other  is  of  the  earth  "  (Philonis  Opera,  i. 
50).  In  the  eighth  chapter  of  the  same  Epistle  there  is 
another  clear  Philonic  expression :  "  One  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  through  whom  are  all  things."  This  view  of 
Christ  as  the  mediating  instrument  of  creation  is  pre- 
cisely the  doctrine  of  Philo  concerning  the  Logos,  and 
the  only  difference  between  Paul  and  Philo  is  that 
Paul  puts  Christ  in  place  of  the  Logos  (Philonis 
Opera,  i.  162).  The  very  passage  in  2  Corinthians  v. 
18,  19,  a  portion  of  which  Dr.  Abbott  quotes  as  "  the 
keynote  of  Paul's  doctrine,"  "all  things  are  of  God, 
who  reconciled  us  to  himself  through  Christ,"  etc.,  has 
a  thoroughly  Philonic  ring,  making  the  Philonic  dis- 
tinction between  God  as  the  originating  cause  (e/c  tov 
6eov),  and  Christ  as  the  instrumental  means  (Sia  ^ptoTov) 
of  redemption.  Philo  makes  much  of  this  distinction 
between  cac  (from)  and  8ta  (through) ,  deriving  it  from 
Aristotle. 


218  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

Thus  much  in  vindication  of  my  view  of  Paul's 
mediation  theory.  It  was  Augustine  who  through  his 
ignorance  of  Greek  theology  paved  the  way  for  a 
Sabellian  doctrine  that  broke  down  the  very  founda- 
tions of  the  Pauline  Greek  mediation  view.  I  have 
illustrated  this  in  my  discussion  of  Anselm's  theory  of 
the  atonement.  "  The  New  Trinitarianism  "  follows 
the  same  lead.  It  has  no  real  mediation  doctrine 
simply  because  it  has  no  ground  on  which  it  can  rest. 

Dr.  Abbott  regards  my  account  of  the  evolution  of 
Trinitarianism  as  "  fatally  defective  "  because  I  have 
"  failed,"  as  he  thinks,  "  in  my  interpretation  of  Paul." 
His  argument  here  is  at  least  curious.  Paul,  he  holds, 
is  "  the  starting-point  of  the  Christological  evolution." 
Failure  to  start  right  vitiates  all  that  follows.  But 
suppose  that  Paul  is  not  the  historical  point  of  de- 
parture, what  then?  Now,  rightly  or  wrongly,  my 
starting-point  of  all  Christian  history  is  Christ  himself. 
How  can  the  evolution  of  Christology  be  made  to  begin 
with  Paul,  who  never  saw  Christ  and  whose  Apostolic 
calling  was  at  least  half  a  generation  after  Christ's 
death?  Behind  Paul  was  Christ's  own  messianic 
career  and  the  traditions  of  his  teaching  which  are 
gathered  up  in  the  Acts  and  Synoptic  gospels.  "  The 
fatal  defect"  of  Dr.  Abbott's  whole  criticism  is  its 
"  failure  "  to  interpret  correctly  the  historical  environ- 
ment of  early  Christianity.  Biblical  exegesis  walks 
with  uncertain  steps  without  the  aid  of  history  to  il- 
luminate its  path.  See  a  suggestive  article  in  the 
"  Biblical  World,"  March,  1901,  by  Prof.  B.  W.  Bacon, 
on  "  Exegesis  as  a  Historical  Study." 


CHAPTER  II 

THE   INTEKNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES 

As  soon  as  a  direct  comparison  is  instituted 
between  the  Ethnic  trinities  and  the  Christian 
trinity,  it  immediately  strikes  the  observer  that 
all  these  trinities  fall  alike  under  the  common  law 
of  historical  evolution.  We  have  seen  how  true 
this  is  of  the  Ethnic  trinities,  and  it  is  equally  true 
of  the  Christian  dogma.  Every  trinitarian  theory 
of  God  that  has  ever  been  developed  has  started 
either  from  a  polytheistic  or  from  a  monotheistic 
doctrinal  basis.  The  Ethnic  trinities,  as  a  rule, 
formed  a  stage  in  the  movement  from  plurality  to 
unity,  though  there  were  exceptions  in  the  case  of 
the  philosophical  trinities,  such  as  the  Hindoo  and 
the  Plotinian,  where,  in  a  pantheistic  way,  the 
movement  was  from  unity  to  trinity.  The  Chris- 
tian dogma  did  not  start  from  a  polytheistic  or 
pantheistic  ground,  but  from  Jewish  monotheism ; 
but  the  development  from  one  God  to  a  trinity  was 
just  as  completely  a  historical  evolution  as  any 
other.  This  has  already  been  fuUy  set  forth  in 
"  A  Critical  History  of  the  Evolution  of  Trinitari- 
anism,"  especially  in  respect  to  the  second  person. 
Readers  of  that  book  will  remember  how  com- 
pletely in  the  background  was  the  question  of  the 


220  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

third  person.  As  was  there  noted,  the  Christian 
dogma  of  the  trinity  had  its  spring  in  the  theory, 
borrowed  from  Greek  philosophy,  of  the  need  of  a 
mediator  (/Aco-tn^s)  between  man  and  God,  and  in 
the  ascription  to  Jesus  Christ  of  such  a  nature 
and  function.  This  was  the  new  view  introduced 
by  Paul  into  Christian  theology,  which  grew  after- 
ward into  the  logos  doctrine,  in  the  hands  of  Jus- 
tin Martyr  and  his  successors.  Thus  Christianity 
theologically  is  essentially  a  Christology^  or  doc- 
trine of  Christ  as  a  second  person  in  the  Godhead. 
Indeed,  strange  as  it  may  appear,  had  it  not  been 
for  the  natural  and  historical  tendency  seen  in  all 
trinitarian  movements  toward  the  evolution  of 
duality  into  triality,  the  Christian  doctrine  of  God 
might  have  remained  that  of  a  "  duad  "  instead  of 
a  "  triad."  The  same  may  be  asserted  of  every 
Ethnic  trinity.  In  the  Egyptian  and  the  Baby- 
lonian trinities  there  was  constant  action  and  re- 
action from  triality  to  duality  and  vice  versa,  — 
polytheism  tending  to  reduce  itself  to  triality  and 
then  to  duality,  and  finally  to  unity ;  and  conversely 
the  doctrine  of  one  God  resolving  itself  into  that 
of  a  duad,  and  in  turn  into  that  of  a  triad,  and 
thus  paving  the  way  for  a  return  to  the  polythe- 
istic belief  which  has  ever  haunted  the  race.  In 
fact,  the  religious  consciousness  of  man  has  always 
fluctuated,  like  a  pendulum,  between  the  two  ex- 
tremes of  polytheism  and  monotheism  in  its  con- 
ception of  divinity,  according  as  its  sense  of  the 
plurality  of   natural   phenomena   and  forces  has 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES     221 

swayed  its  emotions  and  thoughts,  or  as  its  more 
educated  sense  of  the  unity  of  nature  and  natural 
law,  and  of  God  as  its  author,  has  determined  its 
philosophy. 

A  vivid  picture  of  this  evolutionary  uncertainty 
and  fluctuation  is  given  in  the  Babylonian  epic  of 
creation,  —  of  very  early  though  uncertain  date,  — 
where  chaos  with  its  mass  of  multiplied  unorgan- 
ized elements  is  personified  in  Tiamat,  who  is 
made  the  progenitor  of  Lakmu  and  Lakamu. 
These  divinities,  representing  the  "  monster  "  world 
of  half-chaotic  things,  became  in  their  turn  the 
ancestors  of  Anschar  and  Kisha,  who  represent  a 
second  stage  of  movement  toward  order,  and  from 
whom  springs  the  great  Babylonian  triad  of  Anu, 
Bel,  and  Ea.  It  is  through  this  triad  of  gods  that 
the  third  stage  of  evolution  takes  place,  namely, 
the  creation  of  the  world.  Behind  this  picture  lies 
a  complete  polytheism  which  forms  its  substantial 
background.  Plainly,  when  this  epic  was  written, 
the  Babylonian  triad  had  already  been  evolved, 
and  a  place  had  to  be  found  for  it  among  the  ear- 
lier traditions.  The  epic  reveals  the  manner  in 
which  it  was  done.  Chaotic  multiplicity  is  mytho- 
logicaUy  personified  in  Tiamat,  the  principle  of 
disorder ;  and  then,  through  two  successive  rising 
stages  of  evolution,  two  pairs  of  nature  gods  are 
formed,  who  are  made  the  progenitors  of  Anu,  Bel, 
and  Ea.  Other  examples  might  be  given.  In 
fact,  the  Ethnic  trinities  are  shown  to  be  in  a  con- 
tinued state  of  flux,  not  only  from  duality  to  trin- 


222  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

ity  or  quartemity,  or  to  multiples  of  a  triad,  but 
also  from  one  triad  to  another,  as  in  Hindooism, 
from  Varuna,  Indra,  and  Agni  to  Brahma,  Vishnu, 
and  Civa,  and  in  the  Greek  world,  from  Zeus,  Here, 
and  Athene,  to  Zeus,  Athene,  and  Apollo,  and  then 
to  the  philosophical  Plotinian  triad  of  t6  Iv,  6  vovs,  rj 
i}/vxV'  The  remarkable  thing  about  it  all  is  that  the 
idea  of  trinity  is  so  persistent,  holding  its  ground 
tenaciously,  while  so  Proteuslike  in  the  shapes  it 
assumes.  The  same  is  substantially  true  of  the 
Christian  trinity ;  of  course  not  so  fully  or  with 
so  much  of  fluctuation,  for  polytheism  affords  a 
much  wider  field  of  change  than  monotheism,  but 
the  fact  of  constant  evolution  is  just  as  clear  and 
decisive. 

I  propose  to  illustrate  this  now  in  the  case  of 
the  third  person,  the  Holy  Spirit,  especially  in  its 
earlier  evolution.  As  the  idea  of  trinity  is  not  to 
be  found  in  the  Old  Testament,  which  is  strictly 
monotheistic,  it  is  needless  to  enter  into  any  dis- 
cussion as  to  the  meaning  of  the  compression  Holy 
Spirit  in  that  part  of  the  Bible.  Enough  to  say 
that  it  is  never  used  by  itself  to  express  a  person. 
When  employed  it  is  always  an  adjxmct,  as  in  the 
passage,  "  Take  not  thy  Holy  Spirit  from  me." 
The  "  Holy  Spirit  of  God  "  is  a  monotheistic  para- 
phrase of  God  himself.  This  is  the  Old  Testa- 
ment doctrine  throughout.  In  the  New  Testament 
we  first  find  "  the  Holy  Spirit  "  used  separately, 
but  its  adjunctive  or  adjectival  use  still  continues, 
and  indicates  the  real  meaning  of  the  expression 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    223 

when  used  separately,  as  in  the  clause :  "  God  is 
a  spirit."  Certainly  Christ  nowhere  employed  the 
expression  in  any  way  to  indicate  that  he  believed 
in  the  personality  of  the  Holy  Spirit  as  distin- 
guished from  the  personality  of  God.  This  is 
shown  by  his  interchange  of  the  phrases  "  Holy 
Spirit "  and  "  Spirit  of  God."  Let  it  be  noted 
here  that  the  reduction  of  the  gospel  to  writing 
was  made  long  after  Christ's  day,  and  that  mean- 
while the  form  of  Christian  tradition  was  under- 
going a  clear  process  of  evolution.  This,  no  doubt, 
has  not  a  little  to  do  with  the  history  of  the  expres- 
sion "  Holy  Spirit."  But  even  the  Synoptic  gos- 
pels, as  we  have  them,  stiU  continue  the  Old  Tes- 
tament monotheistic  tradition,  and  Professor  Cary 
("  Synoptic  Gospels,"  p.  29)  justly  says  :  "  '  Holy 
Spirit '  throughout  the  Synoptics  is  equivalent  to 
the  '  Spirit  of  God '  or  '  the  divine  Spirit,'  spoken 
of  here  in  verse  35  (Luke)  as  the  power  of  the 
Most  High.  Never  has  the  Hebrew  mind  been 
able  to  accept  the  idea  of  a  division  of  personality 
in  the  divine  nature,  neither  had  the  conception 
of  a  personal  Holy  Spirit  been  developed  in  the 
Christian  church  at  the  time  of  the  writing  of  our 
gospels.  It  is  not  to  be  lost  sight  of  that  we  have 
here  to  deal  with  ideas  held  by  men  who  were 
Jews  before  they  were  Christians."  Let  me  add 
in  support  of  Professor  Gary's  statement,  that  the 
Talmud,  which  represents  Jewish  orthodox  tradi- 
tion as  far  back  as  Christ's  day,  and  surely  cannot 
be  taxed  with  any  trinitarian  tendencies,  again  and 


224  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

again  uses  the  expression  "  Holy  Spirit "  as  equiv- 
alent to  the  spirit  of  God.  For  example, "  Through 
the  reward  of  faith  the  Holy  Spirit  rested  upon 
Israel ;  "  where  "  Holy  Spirit  "  is  plainly  synony- 
mous with  God's  active  immanent  presence  and 
blessing.  Paul  is  here  an  important  witness, 
since  he  lived  before  the  gospels  were  written. 
Not  only  does  Paul  use  the  terms  "  Holy  Spirit," 
"  Spirit  of  God,"  "  Spirit  of  Christ,"  interchange- 
ably, and  without  any  apparent  difference  of  mean- 
ing, but  on  two  separate  occasions,  when  he  gives 
his  doctrine  of  God  in  a  thoroughly  formal  and 
credal  way,  he  ignores  the  Holy  Spirit  entirely. 
(1  Cor.  viii.  6 ;  1  Tim.  ii.  5).  How  could  he  do 
this,  if  he  held  to  a  trinity  of  divine  persons? 
Paul's  theology  of  God  was  the  Jewish  monothe- 
ism of  his  ancestors ;  but  he  added  to  it  his  new 
doctrine  of  Christ :  "  There  is  one  God,  one  medi- 
ator also  between  God  and  man,  himself  man, 
Christ  Jesus."  It  is  true  that  there  are  in  Paul's 
Epistles  a  few  passages  that  might  bear  a  trinita- 
rian  meaning  if  supported  by  more  direct  evidence. 
But  such  corroborative  evidence  is  wanting.  No 
one  can  read  those  Epistles  and  note  how  fre- 
quently and  closely  Paul  connects  the  Spirit  with 
God  and  with  Christ,  without  feeling  assured  that 
he  had  no  clearly  defined  doctrine  of  the  Spirit  as 
a  distinct  Person.  When  the  expression  Spirit  or 
Holy  Spirit  is  used  separately,  the  context  always 
makes  it  clear  that  God  or  Christ  is  intended. 
Take,  for  example,  Romans  viii.  9,  14,  16 :  "  The 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  — RESEMBLANCES    225 

Spirit  himself  beareth  witness,"  is  explained  by 
the  previous  clause,  "  as  many  as  are  led  by  the 
Spirit  of  God,"  and  by  a  still  earlier  passage,  "  if 
so  be  that  the  Spirit  of  God  dwell  in  you.  But  if 
any  man  hath  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  he  is  none 
of  his."  A  similar  passage  occurs  in  1  Cor.  ii.  10- 
14.  The  fact  that  Paul  had  no  decided  trinitarian 
view  is  well  illustrated  in  1  Cor.  vi.  11 :  "  But  ye 
were  justified  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  and  in  the  spirit  of  our  God."  Surely  here 
was  a  fine  opportunity  to  turn  the  duad  into  a 
triad,  but  Paul  ignores  it,  and  plainly  because  in 
his  view  the  sanctifying  and  justifying  power  of 
God  is  specially  manifested  in  him  as  a  Holy 
Spirit.  An  equally  good  opportunity  was  given  in 
2  Tim.  iv.  1 :  "  I  charge  thee  in  the  sight  of  God 
and  of  Jesus  Christ,"  but  Paid,  does  not  add  "  and 
of  the  Holy  Spirit."  StiU,  it  seems  probable  that 
already  in  Paul's  day  the  tendency  was  growing  to 
invest  the  Spirit  of  God  with  personal  attributes. 
And  there  is  a  single  passage  in  Paul's  Epistles 
where  this  trinitarian  tendency  is  plainly  hovering 
over  the  apostle's  mind.  I  refer  to  the  trinitarian 
benediction  (2  Cor.  xii.  14).  If  this  is  not  a  later 
interpolation,  it  bears  marks  that  cannot  be  easily 
overlooked  of  a  well-defined  trinitarianism. 

But  supposing  it  to  be  genuine,  and  an  indica- 
tion of  Paul's  trinitarian  tendency,  one  cannot 
help  asking  why  such  a  benediction  was  never 
repeated.  Why  were  all  Paul's  other  benedictions 
in  the  name  of   God,  or  of   Christ,  or  of  both  ? 


226  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

And  then,  further,  why  was  every  doxology  of 
Paul,  without  a  single  exception,  addressed  to  God 
alone?  There  is  but  one  satisfactory  answer. 
Paul  believed  in  "  one  God  "  and  in  the  one  Holy 
Spirit  of  God.  Christ  was  for  him  a  mediator 
between  God  and  men,  but  not  God  himself.  As 
such  a  mediator  Christ  was  a  proper  object  of 
intercessory  prayer.  God  was  properly  addressed 
in  Christ's  name.  But  God  alone  was  the  one 
object  of  worship  and  praise.  Hence  every  dox- 
ology was  to  him.  On  the  whole,  without  enter- 
ing upon  a  fuller  critical  discussion  of  New  Testa- 
ment texts,  it  can  be  said  without  hesitation,  that 
while  a  clear  tendency  is  discernible  in  the  New 
Testament  writings  towards  a  trinitarian  view  of 
God  culminating  in  the  Fourth  Gospel,  of  which  I 
shall  speak  later,  there  is  no  evidence  outside  of 
that  gospel  of  any  distinctly  developed  doctrine 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  as  a  third  person  in  a  trinity. 
Whether  this  tendency  is  regarded  as  greater  or 
less,  the  only  historical  result  that  can  be  relied 
on  is  that  an  evolution  is  begun  which  will  natu- 
rally complete  itseK  in  the  f  uUy  developed  trinity  of 
the  fourth  century. 

This  conclusion  is  amply  sustained  by  the 
evidence  of  the  earliest  post-apostolic  Fathers. 
Especially  important  are  the  Epistles  of  Clement, 
Barnabas,  and  Polycarp,  and  "  The  Teaching  of 
the  Twelve  Apostles."  These  four  writings  I  have 
placed  in  their  probable  chronological  order, 
though  some  critics  would  assign  an  earlier  date 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    227 

to  the  "Teaching."  The  Epistle  of  Clement  is 
undoubtedly  the  earliest  post-apostolic  document 
that  has  come  down  to  us.  Lightfoot  fixes  its 
date  "  about  the  year  95."  In  many  ways  this 
Epistle  is  of  great  importance.  It  shows  that  the 
gospel  was  still  largely  communicated  orally.  No 
clear  sign  is  given  of  aquaintance  with  our  present 
four  gospels,  though  the  writer  may  have  had 
some  apocryphal  gospel  in  his  hands.  By  the 
"  Scriptures  "  he  always  means  the  Old  Testament. 
Thus  proof  is  furnished,  which  other  evidence  of 
the  same  nature  makes  entirely  convincing,  that 
our  present  gospels  were  written  after  a  consider- 
able traditional  evolution  of  the  Christian  faith 
had  already  taken  place. 

On  the  question  of  the  Holy  Spirit  the  evidence 
of  Clement  is  quite  indefinite.  The  expression 
"  Holy  Spirit "  is  used  several  times  in  the  plain 
sense  of  the  spirit  of  God  or  of  Christ,  as  when 
the  Old  Testament  Scriptures  are  described  as 
the  "  true  utterances  of  the  Holy  Spirit,"  and 
when  the  apostolic  preachers  are  said  to  have  been 
"  proved  by  the  Spirit."  There  is  also  one  passage 
in  the  newly  discovered  portion  of  the  Epistle 
which  has  a  decided  trinitarian  ring  and  indicates 
the  tendency  which  was  in  the  air  towards  the 
later  trinitarian  dogma :  "  As  God  liveth,  and  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  liveth,  and  the  Holy  Spirit." 
This  surely  proves,  if  it  be  genuine,  that  the 
trinitarian  idea  was  growing.  But,  on  the  other 
hand,  it  is  equally  clear  that  a  trinity  has  not  yet 


228  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

been  fuUy  developed,  for  the  two  doxologies  are 
strictly  monotheistic,  and  the  benedictions  at  the 
beginning  and  end  of  the  Epistle  make  no  allusion 
to  the  Holy  Spirit,  though  both  God  and  Christ 
are  mentioned.  This  view  that  the  trinitarian 
evolution  is  only  begun,  especially  in  the  case  of 
the  third  person,  is  supported  by  the  testimony  of 
the  Epistles  of  Polycarp  and  of  Barnabas,  which 
belong  to  the  second  quarter  of  the  second  century. 
In  neither  of  these  Epistles  is  there  any  reference 
to  the  Holy  Spirit  or  to  a  trinity.  The  benedic- 
tions are  not  trinitarian.  The  Epistle  of  Poly- 
carp begins :  "  Peace  from  God  Almighty  and 
from  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  be  multiplied,"  and 
the  conclusion  is  similar.  The  Epistle  of  Barna- 
bas begins  and  ends  with  a  simple  Christian 
salutation.  Both  of  these  Epistles  have  a  thor- 
oughly primitive  air.  Neither  refers  to  John  or 
the  Fourth  Gospel,  nor  is  any  gospel  named ;  but 
Christ's  sayings  are  quoted  as  if  from  oral  tradi- 
tion, for  example :  "  As  the  Lord  said,  '  The 
spirit  truly  is  willing,  but  the  flesh  is  weak.' " 
There  is,  indeed,  in  the  present  text  of  Barnabas 
an  apparent  exception  :  "  As  it  is  written,  '  Many 
are  called,  but  few  are  chosen,' "  but  its  genuine- 
ness is  very  doubtful.  If  it  is  not  an  interpola- 
tion, it  is  "  the  first  example  in  the  writings  of 
the  Fathers  of  a  citation  from  any  book  of  the 
New  Testament  preceded  by  the  authoritative 
formula  '  it  is  written.'  "  ^     But  if  Barnabas  really 

1  Apostolic  Fathers,  T.  and  T.  Clark,  p.  107. 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    229 

was  acquainted  with  any  written  gospel,  is  it  not 
strange  that  he  gives  no  other  sign  of  acquaint- 
ance, either  by  mention  or  by  a  clear  citation  ?  The 
fact  is  that  there  is  no  evidence  of  the  growth  of 
a  New  Testament  canon  tiU.  the  time  of  Justin 
Martyr.  Whenever  in  the  earlier  Fathers  the 
expression  "  the  Scripture "  is  employed,  the 
reference  is  to  the  Old  Testament.  Passages  are 
also  given  which  are  plainly  from  apocryphal 
books.  Polycarp,  indeed,  exhibits  a  thorough 
acquaintance  with  Paul's  Epistles  and  quotes 
freely  from  them,  —  a  fact  which  makes  the  ab- 
sence of  quotation  from  any  gospel  still  more 
noticeable.  I  have  dwelt  on  these  points  as  help- 
ing to  show  how  uncertain  and  fluxive  is  the  gen- 
eral condition  of  Christian  thought  and  belief  a 
hundred  years  after  Christ's  death.  If  any  one 
of  the  four  gospels  is  known,  it  is  not  directly  re- 
ferred to,  or  certainly  quoted  from,  neither  is  the 
name  of  any  author  given.  The  same  indefinite  and 
fluxive  character  is  seen  in  the  trinitarian  develop- 
ment. Polycarp  and  Barnabas  represent  a  sort 
of  half-way  house  from  monotheism  to  trinitarian- 
ism.  They  hold  to  one  God  and  one  Lord  Jesus, 
but  go  no  further. 

"  The  Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles "  is 
closely  connected  with  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas  in 
general  character.  In  some  respects  it  seems  the 
most  primitive  of  all  the  post-apostolic  writings, 
reminding  one  of  the  Book  of  Acts.  As  in  that 
book,    Christ  is   again   and   again   called    God's 


230  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

"  servant  Jesus  "  (ttols).  The  indications  of  de- 
pendence on  oral  tradition  rather  than  on  written 
gospels  are  clear  and  decided.  Christ's  teaching 
is  always  referred  to  as  "  the  gospel,"  and  the 
plural  "  gospels  "  is  never  employed,  as  came  to 
be  the  case  when  the  gospel  was  reduced  to  writ- 
ing by  several  hands.  The  passage  from  oral  to 
written  tradition  may  be  gauged  quite  accurately 
by  this  mark.  The  singular  term  gospel  is  em- 
ployed by  all  the  post-apostolic  Fathers  until 
Justin  Martyr,  who  is  the  first  to  refer  to  certain 
gospels  which  he  caUs  "  Memoirs  of  the  Apostles." 
Other  evidence,  as  that  of  Papias,  shows  that 
this  was  the  very  period  when  oral  tradition  was 
giving  place  to  written  gospels.  I  cannot  accept, 
therefore,  the  judgment  of  several  recent  critics, 
that  the  clause  at  the  close  of  chapter  xv.,  "  So 
do  ye,  as  ye  have  it  (^x^O  ^^  *^®  gospel  of  our 
Lord,"  is  an  allusion  to  a  written  gospel.  The  verb 
€X€T€  simply  indicates  present  possession,  but  gives 
no  direct  clue  to  the  manner  in  which  such  posses- 
sion was  attained.  Such  a  clause  has  little  weight 
against  the  whole  tenor  of  "  The  Teaching,"  which 
continually  refers  to  Christ  himself  and  his  pro- 
phets and  apostles  as  the  sources  of  the  teaching : 
"  The  Lord  commandeth  ;  "  "  The  Lord  hath 
said ;  "  "  Him  that  speaketh  to  thee  the  word  of 
the  Lord,"  etc.  The  prominence  given  in  "  The 
Teaching "  to  the  work  of  "  apostles  and  pro- 
phets "  and  to  exhortations  as  to  the  way  in  which 
they  were  to  be  received  affords  strong  evidence 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    231 

that  the  teaching  of  the  gospel  was  oral  rather 
than  written.  "  Whoever  cometh  and  teacheth 
you  all  these  things^  before  spohen^  receive  him." 

Examining  now  the  "  The  Teaching  "  for  light 
on  the  question  of  its  trinitarianism,  we  find  it  in 
close  agreement  with  the  Epistles  of  Clement, 
Polycarp,  and  Barnabas.  With  the  exception  of  a 
single  passage,  to  which  I  shall  soon  refer,  it  indi- 
cates the  same  indefinite  and  inchoate  character. 
Its  doctrine  of  God  is  strictly  monotheistic.  No 
trace  appears  of  the  Pauline  Greek  "mediator" 
element.  Christ  is  the  servant  of  God  and  the 
Lord  or  master  of  his  disciples.  It  is  the  Pales- 
tinian Messianism,  not  the  Alexandrian  Logos 
doctrine.  The  doxologies  are  addressed  to  God 
alone.  Only  in  a  single  passage  is  there  a  hint  of 
a  trinitarian  tendency,  namely,  in  the  formula  of 
baptism,  which  appears  for  the  first  time  in  com- 
plete trinitarian  form :  "  Baptize  in  the  name  of 
the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghost."  When  or  how  this  formula  originated  is 
whoUy  unknown.  The  only  sign  of  it  in  the  New 
Testament  is  in  Mat.  xxviii.  19,  where  Christ 
is  represented  as  giving  it  to  his  disciples.  The 
plainly  unhistorical  character  of  this  passage  is 
proved  by  the  fact  that  after  Christ's  death  the 
form  of  baptism  was  "  into  Christ "  and  not  into 
the  Trinity,  Paul  knows  nothing  of  the  trinitarian 
formula.  It  thus  becomes  evident  that  the  verse 
at  the  close  of  Matthew  is  an  interpolation  of  a 
later  time,  or  that  the  whole  gospel  in  its  present 


232  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

shape  was  composed  well  on  in  the  second  century ; 
and  this  agrees  with  the  indirect  and  negative 
testimony  of  the  Epistles  of  Clement,  Polycarp,  and 
Barnabas. 

It  may  here  be  noted  that  the  evolution  of 
Christian  trinitarianism  is  mainly  traceable  along 
three  lines  of  evidence :  the  form  of  benediction, 
the  baptismal  formula,  and  the  developing  creed 
of  the  church ;  and  it  will  be  found  that  the  order 
above  given  is  in  fact  the  chronological  order  of 
comparative  evolution.  Paul  gets  as  far  once  as 
a  trinitarian  benediction,  though  he  never  aUudes 
to  the  trinitarian  formula  of  baptism  or  suggests 
any  trinitarian  creed.  So  "  The  Teaching  of  the 
Twelve  Apostles  "  gives  the  trinitarian  baptismal 
formula,  but  is  altogether  silent  as  to  the  doctrine 
of  the  trinity. 

It  is  an  interesting  question  in  this  connection, 
when  the  so-called  Apostles'  Creed  was  originally 
written,  and  what  was  its  first  form.  Its  name 
rests  entirely  on  legendary  ground.  In  its  present 
shape  it  is  as  late  as  the  seventh  or  eighth  century. 
Professor  Sanday's  suggestion  that  there  was  an 
earlier  creed  behind  it  is  quite  probable,  but  if  so, 
it  is  now  lost.  The  earliest  form  of  a  creed  that 
is  similar  in  character  to  the  Apostles'  Creed  is 
found  in  Irenaeus,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  second 
century,  and  a  like  form  is  also  given  in  Tertullian 
a  little  later.  There  is  no  reference,  however,  in 
either  of  these  writers  to  the  "  Apostles'  Creed," 
as  would  naturally  have  been  the  case  had  the 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    233 

tradition  of  such  a  creed  with  apostolic  authority- 
been  in  vogue  in  that  day.  Irenaeus  expressly  de- 
clared that  his  creed  was  generally  accepted  by 
the  church.  How  eagerly  would  he  have  appealed 
to  the  authority  of  the  apostles,  had  the  creed  put 
forth  in  their  names  been  already  extant !  While, 
therefore,  the  materials  of  the  Apostles'  Creed 
were  undoubtedly  gathering  in  the  course  of  the 
second  century,  the  creed  itself,  even  in  its  original 
form,  cannot  be  assigned  to  an  earlier  date  than 
the  third  century.  The  significance  of  this  creed 
lies  in  the  fact  that  it  is  based  in  its  very  form 
as  well  as  substance  on  the  trinitarian  conception. 
Its  twelve  clauses  (according  to  the  legend,  con- 
tributed by  the  twelve  apostles)  are  subdivided 
into  three  parts,  each  revolving  around  one  of  the 
three  persons  of  the  trinity.  The  traditional  title 
of  this  creed  has  undoubtedly  had  largely  to  do 
with  the  veneration  that  has  been  accorded  to  it  in 
the  Western  church  since  it  came  into  general  use 
in  the  early  Middle  Ages.  But  the  belief  that  it 
represents  the  real  creed  of  the  church  of  1;he  early 
post-apostolic  age  must  be  given  up.  It  is  a 
Latin,  not  a  Greek,  confession,  and  is  undoubt- 
edly an  offshoot  of  the  growing  creed  of  the  Ro- 
man church.  The  Greek  church  knew  nothing  of 
it,  as  was  declared  in  the  Council  of  Florence  in 
the  fifteenth  century,  when  an  effort  was  made  to 
heal  the  schism  between  the  Greek  and  Latin 
churches.  To  say,  as  Dr.  Schaff  has  done,  in  his 
History  of  the  Church :  "  The  Apostles'  Creed  in 


234  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

its  present  shape  is  post-apostolic ;  but  in  its  con- 
tents and  spirit  truly  apostolic,"  conveys  a  whoUy 
false  impression  as  to  the  real  facts.  It  is  nei- 
ther apostolic  nor  post-apostolic  in  the  historical 
meaning  of  that  term.  No  early  Greek  Father 
makes  any  allusion  to  it.  Its  thoroughly  trinita- 
rian  character  makes  it  a  historical  anachronism 
when  dated  at  any  point  earlier  than  Irenseus, 
about  180.  I  have  introduced  the  question  of  the 
Apostles'  Creed,  so  called,  here,  —  though  properly 
it  should  come  in  later,  as  representing  a  later 
stage  of  evolution,  —  because  the  traditional  idea 
of  it,  which  is  whoUy  unhistorical,  is  so  ingrained 
in  the  popular  Christian  mind.  The  impression  is 
widely  spread  to-day  that,  whatever  view  may  be 
taken  of  the  Nicene  and  other  later  creeds,  the 
Apostles'  Creed  is  essentially  apostolic,  and  con- 
tains essential  gospel  truth.  Christian  scholars 
like  Dr.  Schaff,  who  show  in  their  writings  that 
they  are  aware  of  the  facts,  have  helped  to  per- 
petuate this  mistaken  view,  in  the  interests,  I 
suppose,  of  what  they  regard  as  "  the  faith  once 
delivered."  Dr.  Schaff  declares  that  "  it  has  the 
authority  of  antiquity  and  the  dew  of  perennial 
youth  beyond  any  other  document  of  post-apos- 
tolic times,  and  is  the  only  strictly  oecumenical 
creed  of  the  "West,  as  the  Nicene  Creed  is  the  only 
oecumenical  creed  of  the  East."  In  the  last  clause 
of  this  statement  Dr.  Schaff  has  innocently  given 
proof  that  his  own  assertion  was  false.  How  about 
the  "  oecumenical "  standing  of  the  Apostles'  Creed 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    235 

in  the  East  f  And  if  it  was  not  "  oecumenical  in 
the  East,"  how  could  it  have  "  the  authority  of 
antiquity  "  ?  Dr.  Schaff  has  simply  made  a  his- 
torical jump  of  several  centuries  without  any 
adequate  evidence  to  sustain  it.  It  is  a  pure  leap 
in  the  air.  The  so-called  Apostles'  Creed  repre- 
sents, not  an  original  dogma  of  the  gospel,  but  an 
evolutionary  development  that  did  not  reach  its 
fuU  limit  until  it  appeared  as  a  Latin  creed  of  the 
Western  church  in  the  eighth  century.  Before 
leaving  this  special  topic  and  returning  to  the  his- 
torical survey  of  the  growth  of  early  apostolic 
trinitarianism,  I  would  add  that,  if  any  one  wishes 
to  gain  a  vivid  idea  of  the  evolutionary  character 
of  creeds,  let  him  read  a  small  book  by  an  English 
Oxford  scholar  of  conservative  instincts,  C.  A. 
Heartley,  entitled,  "  Harmonia  Symbolica,"  which 
gives  a  full  account  of  the  slow  and  hesitating  way 
in  which  the  creeds  of  Christendom,  especially  the 
Western,  were  developed. 

To  return,  we  have  found  in  the  first  stage 
of  the  post-apostolic  period,  as  represented  by 
Clement,  Polycarp,  Barnabas,  and  "  The  Teaching 
of  the  Twelve  Apostles,"  only  sporadic  tendencies 
toward  a  trinitarian  view  of  God.  These  tenden- 
cies we  have  noted  along  three  lines  of  movement, 
namely,  the  Christian  benediction,  the  formula  of 
baptism,  and  the  growth  of  the  trinitarian  dogma. 
Everything  has  thus  far  been  tentative  and  flux- 
ive.  Nothing  like  a  "  creed "  has  yet  been  at- 
tempted.    The  benediction  and  doxology  are  still 


236  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

monotheistic.  The  baptismal  formula  has  become 
changed  in  one  single  instance^  we  know  not  how 
or  just  when,  from  "  into  Christ  "to  "  into  the 
Father,  the  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost."  There  is  one 
further  piece  of  evidence  left  us  in  the  first  period 
which  has  a  unique  significance  and  interest.  No 
documents  of  this  early  age  have  been  more  the 
subject  of  controversy,  as  to  their  authenticity  and 
historical  authority,  than  the  Ignatian  Epistles. 
The  conclusion  of  Bishop  Lightfoot  is  certainly 
one  that  conservative  scholars  to-day  generally 
accept,  namely,  that  the  seven  longer  Epistles 
have  been  so  largely  interpolated  as  to  have  lost 
all  independent  authority ;  but  that  the  sJiorter 
Epistles  are  genuine  and  historical  documents.  I 
am  not  ready  myself  to  accept  the  historicity  of 
the  shorter  Epistles,  for  they  bear  unmistakable 
traces  of  legend  as  well  as  interpolation ;  but 
surely  there  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  the  strength  of 
Lightfoot's  destructive  criticism  in  the  case  of  the 
longer  Epistles.  Assuming,  then,  that  these  Epis- 
tles represent  an  interpolated  and  amended  recen- 
sion of  the  shorter  ones,  let  us  consult  them  for 
the  light  they  may  shed  on  the  points  before  us. 
First,  on  the  trinitarian  tendency  of  the  Christian 
benediction.  Three  of  the  seven  Epistles  close  in 
this  way,  and,  in  the  longer  version  of  all  of  them, 
the  Holy  Spirit  is  included  with  God  the  Father 
and  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  while  it  is  absent  from 
all  three  in  the  earlier  shorter  Epistles.  Take  the 
Epistle    to   the    Ephesians,   for   example.      The 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    237 

shorter  version  reads :  "  Farewell  in  God  the 
Father  and  in  Jesus  Christ,  our  common  hope." 
In  the  longer  form  there  is  added  "  and  in  the 
Holy  Ghost."  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Philadel- 
phians  the  shorter  version  reads :  "  Fare  ye  well 
in  Christ  Jesus,  our  common  Lord ; "  the  longer 
version  reads :  "  Fare  ye  weU  in  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  our  common  hope  in  the  Holy  Ghost." 
The  Epistle  to  the  Smyrnians  gives  a  further 
evolution :  "  Fare  ye  well  in  the  grace  of  God  " 
becomes  "  Fare  ye  well  in  the  grace  of  God,  and 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  being  filled  with  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  divine  and  sacred  wisdom."  The 
close  of  another  Epistle,  namely,  that  to  the  Mag- 
nesians,  makes  clear  the  real  doctrine  of  the 
shorter  Epistles :  "  Fare  ye  well  in  the  harmony 
of  God,  and  possess  ye  a  steadfast  spirit  which  is 
Jesus  Christ"  (Lightfoot's  translation).  There 
is  no  allusion  here  to  any  third  person.  But 
the  longer  version  gives  a  trinitarian  twist  to  the 
original  text:  "Fare  ye  well  in  harmony,  ye 
who  have  obtained  the  steadfast  Spirit,  in  Jesus 
Christ,  by  the  will  of  God." 

If  now  we  turn  our  attention  to  the  line  of  de- 
velopment of  the  trinitarian  dogma  in  its  creed 
form,  we  shall  find  a  similar  evolution.  There  are 
one  or  two  suggestions  of  a  trinity  in  the  shorter 
Epistles,  but  in  the  longer  Epistles  there  are  com- 
plete trinitarian  statements  which  are  wholly  want- 
ing in  the  shorter.  For  example :  "If  any  one 
confesses  the  Father  and  the  Son  and  the  Holy 


238  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

Spirit"  (Phil.  vi.).  Again,  "The  Comforter  is 
holy  and  the  Word  is  Holy,  the  Son  of  the  Father." 
Perhaps  the  most  remarkable  passage  is  the  follow- 
ing, which  has  a  suggestive  credal  air :  "  Since 
there  is  but  one  unbegotten  being,  God,  even  the 
Father,  and  one  only-begotten  Son,  God,  the  Word 
and  man,  and  one  Comforter,  the  Spirit  of  truth  " 
(Phil.  iv.).  No  one  who  is  at  aU  acquainted  with 
early  church  history  can  help  noting  the  strange- 
ness of  such  dogmatic  language,  put  in  the  mouth 
of  a  Christian  bishop  who  was  supposed  to  have 
died  a  martyr  in  the  opening  years  of  the  second 
century.  Two  words  in  these  statements  prove 
conclusively  that  they  are  interpolations,  —  "  Com- 
forter" and  "Word."  Neither  of  these  terms  is 
ever  used  in  the  shorter  Epistles.  Moreover,  they 
do  not  appear  in  any  authentic  writing  till  nearly 
two  generations  after  the  supposed  date  of  the 
Ignatian  Epistles.  I  shall  refer  to  this  matter  later, 
and  will  only  add  here  that  I  know  of  no  more 
striking  and  conclusive  testimony  to  the  incomplete 
and  fluxive  character  of  the  early  trinitarianism 
than  the  results  brought  before  us  by  the  compar- 
ative study  of  the  Ignatian  Epistles.  In  truth, 
the  transparent  interpolations  of  the  longer  Epis- 
tles are  suggestive  indications  and  omens  of  the 
great  movement  which  wiU  mark  the  next  stage  of 
evolution  which  we  are  now  to  consider,  namely, 
that  from  a  duad  to  a  triads  brought  about  by 
the  influence  of  Greek  philosophy. 

This  stage  is  represented  in  its  origin  by  Justin 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS -- RESEMBLANCES    239 

Martyr,  about  the  middle  of  the  second  century. 
As  my  present  object  is  not  to  trace  the  whole 
trinitarian  evolution,  but  simply  that  of  the  third 
person,  I  shall  omit  any  detailed  account  of  the 
introduction  by  Justin  Martyr  and  his  immediate 
successors  of  the  Greek  logos  doctrine  into  Chris- 
tian theology.  This  is  the  real  philosophical  basis 
of  Christian  trinitarianism.  Henceforth  what  was 
before  indefinite  and  fluxive  tends  to  become  defi- 
nite and  fixed,  since  it  has  found  a  philosophical 
centre  around  which  to  revolve.  From  the  time  of 
Justin  the  doctrine  of  the  second  person  assumes 
the  dogmatic  mould  which  it  has  substantially  pre- 
served ever  since.  The  later  Nicene  discussions 
all  assumed  the  logos  doctrine,  but  developed  dif- 
ferences as  to  its  precise  theological  character. 
Not  so  with  the  question  of  the  third  person.  The 
word  trinity  does  not  appear  until  Theophilus 
(168-188),  who  for  the  first  time  employs  the 
term  rpta?,  which  corresponds  to  the  Latin  trinitas, 
StiU,  the  tendency  towards  a  dogmatic  trinitarian 
statement  is  greatly  strengthened  by  the  new  logos 
doctrine.  Justin  Martyr  himself  makes  one  dis- 
tinct allusion  to  three  persons :  "  Having  learned 
that  Jesus  Christ  is  the  son  of  the  true  God  him- 
self, and  holding  him  in  the  second  place,  and  the 
prophetic  Spirit  in  the  third  "  (1  Apol.  xiii.).  He 
also  gives  the  baptismal  trinitarian  formula  in  his 
account  of  the  mode  of  baptism  (1  Apol.  Ixi.). 
But  the  trinitarian  dogma  still  sits  lightly  on  him, 
as  is  shown    by    another  passage  in  the   same 


240  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

Apology  (vi.),  where,  in  refuting  the  charge  of 
atheism,  he  mentions  the  various  objects  of  Chris- 
tian worship  :  "  God,  and  the  Son  who  came  forth 
from  him,  and  the  host  of  good  angels  who  follow 
and  are  made  like  to  him,  and  the  prophetic 
Spirit."  Here  the  order  of  superiority  seems 
clearly  to  be  given,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  is  plainly 
viewed  as  a  sort  of  heavenly  messenger  rather  than 
as  a  member  of  the  trinity.  Dogmatic  writers  have 
attempted  to  give  another  translation  of  this  pas- 
sage, but  such  a  begging  of  the  question  is  foolish 
and  vain.  Neander  explains  it  rightly  as  showing 
a  "  wavering  "  on  Justin's  part  "  between  the  idea 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  one  of  the  members  of  the 
Triad,  and  a  spirit  standing  in  some  relationship 
with  the  angels."  This  question  whether  the  Holy 
Spirit  is  a  divine  member  of  the  trinity  or  a  crea- 
ture was  long  debated  in  the  early  church,  and  was 
not  dogmatically  settled  tiU  the  Nicene  age.  Ori- 
gen  as  well  as  Arius  held  that  the  Holy  Spirit  was 
a  creature,  with  a  beginning  in  time.  It  is  notable 
that  Justin,  while  making  much  of  the  logos  .doc- 
trine, as  regards  the  second  person,  makes  no  men- 
tion of  the  Paraclete,  or  Comforter.  This  is  very 
significant,  as  showing  that  the  doctrine  of  the  third 
person  is  much  less  in  discussion  than  that  of  the 
second.  Surely,  if  the  doctrine  of  the  third  per- 
son were  at  the  front,  and  the  Fourth  Gospel  was 
also  in  their  hands,  Justin,  Athanagoras,  Tatian, 
or  Theophilus  would  have  made  use  of  the  re- 
markable fourteenth  and  fifteenth  chapters  of  that 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    241 

gospeL  But  this  is  not  the  case.  Irenaeus  is  the 
first  among  the  early  Fathers  to  aUude  to  the  Par- 
aclete and  to  quote  from  the  Fourth  Gospel  in  con- 
nection with  it.  It  is  also  a  fact  worthy  of  atten- 
tion that  Irenaeus  is  the  first  Father  to  give  a 
distinct  creed  or  dogmatic  formula  on  a  trinitarian 
basis.  The  church  Fathers  from  Justin  Martyr  to 
Irenaeus  hold  steadfastly  to  the  logos  doctrine, 
but  waver  concerning  the  dogma  of  the  third  per- 
son. Athanagoras  in  a  remarkable  passage  says  : 
"  The  Holy  Spirit  himself  also,  which  operates  in 
the  prophets,  we  assert  to  be  an  effluence  of  God, 
flowing  from  him  and  returning  back  again  like  a 
beam  of  the  sun."  This  certainly  is  far  from  the 
fully  developed  Nicene  doctrine,  and  strikingly 
suggests  the  coming  SabeUianism  that  already  lurks 
in  the  air.  A  little  later,  Theophilus  of  Antioch 
gives  us  another  curious  illustration  of  the  still 
undeveloped  character  of  the  doctrine  of  God,  es- 
pecially as  regards  the  third  person.  He  is  giving 
an  account  of  the  successive  days  of  creation  :  "  In 
like  manner  also  the  three  days  which  were  before 
the  luminaries  are  types  of  the  trinity  of  God  and 
his  Word  and  his  Wisdom."  Here,  to  be  sure, 
there  is  a  fuU  trinity  ;  but  the  Holy  Spirit  is  left 
wholly  out,  and  its  place  is  taken  by  a  term  which 
was  often  applied  to  the  second  person,  but  never, 
so  far  as  I  am  aware,  to  the  Holy  Spirit  in  a  per- 
sonal sense.  In  another  passage  Theophilus  de- 
scribes the  Logos,  or  second  person,  as  "  the  Spirit 
of   God  and   governing   principle   and   wisdom." 


242  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

But  all  this  wavering  and  uncertainty  ends  with 
Irenseus ;  and  I  need  not  pursue  the  subject  fur- 
ther, except  to  say  in  general  that  a  third  stage 
of  evolution  begins  with  him,  in  which  the  doctrine 
of  a  full  trinity,  including  the  Holy  Spirit  as  a 
personal  divine  though  subordinate  being,  is  dog- 
matically set  forth  in  creed  definitions.  Promi- 
nent in  this  stage,  especially  at  first,  is  the  use  of 
the  Fourth  Gospel  and  its  doctrine  of  the  Paraclete. 
Tertullian,  whose  Montanism  led  him  to  make  much 
of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  was  a  stout  opponent  of  all 
anti-trinitarian  ideas,  which  were  now  rife  in  the 
church.  In  short,  we  have  now,  in  the  third  cen- 
tury, entered  the  era  of  dogmatic  controversy, 
which  will  continue  on  into  the  Nicene  and  post- 
Nicene  age.  In  this  controversial  period,  which 
is  characterized  by  the  influence  of  the  mystical 
Fourth  Gospel,  and  by  the  deep  infusion  of  the 
speculative  spirit  of  Greek  philosophy,  Origen  had 
a  conspicuous  place.  He  was  the  first  to  unfold, 
on  the  basis  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  the  doctrine  of 
the  "  Holy  Spirit,  whom  our  Lord  and  Saviour  in 
the  Gospel  according  to  John  has  named  the  Par- 
aclete." Christ,  in  his  description  of  the  Para- 
clete, according  to  Origen,  "wished  to  enlighten 
his  disciples  regarding  the  nature  and  faith  of  the 
trinity."  The  whole  chapter  in  the  work  De  Prin- 
cipiis  (B.  II.  c.  vi.)  is  of  great  historical  signifi- 
cance, and  may  be  said  to  have  laid  the  foundation 
of  the  completed  dogma  concerning  the  Holy  Ghost 
as  the  third  person,  which  appears  in  the  Niceno- 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    243 

Constantinopolitan  creed.  Yet  it  must  not  be 
forgotten  that  Origen  held  the  Holy  Spirit  to  be 
a  creature,  occupying  a  midway  position  between 
God  and  man,  and  not  to  be  for  a  moment  con- 
founded, any  more  than  the  second  person,  the 
Logos  of  God,  with  the  eternal  God  himself.  Ori- 
gen was  what  might  be  fitly  termed  a  mo7iotheistic 
trinitarian,  as  Paul  might  be  styled  a  monotheis- 
tic dualist,  and  he  thus  represents  the  haK-way 
movement  of  the  pendulum  from  the  position  of 
Paul  to  that  of  Athanasius. 

My  aim  in  following  the  history  of  the  third 
person  of  the  Christian  trinity  thus  far  has  been 
to  illustrate  the  fact  that  the  law  of  historical  evo- 
lution is  common  to  all  trinitarian  ideas.  Such  a 
common  law,  working  alike  in  the  Ethnic  and 
Christian  trinities,  must  involve  further  radical 
resemblances.  The  truth  is  that  the  fundamental 
religious  ideas  that  are  to  be  found  in  all  the  his- 
torical religions  are  the  outgrowth  of  a  common  re- 
ligious nature  in  man,  and  we  may  therefore  expect 
to  find  common  religious  elements  in  all  such  reli- 
gions, however  diversified  they  may  become  under 
varied  providential  environments  and  influences. 
This  is  just  as  true  of  trinitarian  ideas  as  of  any 
other  form  of  dogma.  We  are  prepared,  then,  to 
find  that  the  fundamental  causes  which  led  to  the 
development  of  the  Ethnic  trinities  have  worked 
equally  in  the  evolution  of  the  Christian  trinity. 
We  found  three  fundamental  grounds  or  causes 
of  the  trinitarian  evolution  in  the  Ethnic  religions, 


244  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

namely,  (1)  the  peculiar  sacredness  attaching  to 
three  as  a  number  in  the  early  ideas  of  men; 
(2)  the  faifmly  or  generative  'principle^  which  lies 
at  the  very  basis  of  human  life  and  society  ;  (3)  the 
mediation  theory^  which  grew  out  of  the  sense 
of  distance  of  man  from  God,  and  of  the  need 
of  some  go-between  who  should  be  the  medium  of 
prayers  and  gifts.  Were  we  wholly  unacquainted 
with  the  history  of  the  Christian  religion,  we 
should  expect  to  find  in  it,  after  our  historical 
survey  of  the  Ethnic  trinities,  the  same  general 
principles  and  causes  working  toward  a  trinitarian 
doctrine  of  God.  The  Christian  trinity,  in  fact, 
is  not  only  historically  connected  with  the  Ethnic 
trinities,  but  has  also  an  intimate  logical  and  in- 
ternal relationship.  The  causes  that  contributed 
in  the  most  marked  degree  to  the  development  of 
the  Ethnic  trinities  are  equally  visible  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  Christian  dogma.  This  comparison, 
in  order  to  be  made  clear  and  definite,  will  neces- 
sitate a  cursory  resume  of  some  of  our  previous 
studies. 

It  is  impossible,  as  we  have  said,  to  trace  the 
triadal  or  triple  idea,  in  its  connection  with  the 
gods,  to  its  historical  source.  It  lies  behind  all 
historical  records.  So  the  special  occult  signifi- 
cance or  sacredness  of  certain  numbers  seems  to 
be  one  of  the  earliest  traditions  of  the  race.  The 
traditions  in  Genesis  in  regard  to  the  origin  of  the 
Sabbath  show  how  early  seven  must  have  become 
a  specially  sacred  number.    The  explanation  there 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    245 

given,  in  the  account  of  creation,  is  of  course 
wholly  mythological  and  unscientific ;  it  assumes 
a  creation  of  the  world  in  six  days  and  a  resting 
of  God  afterwards,  as  if  he  could  become  weary. 
How  unhistorical  this  assumption  is  I  need  not 
say,  in  the  light  of  recent  scientific  discoveries. 
The  real  explanation  of  the  sacredness  of  seven  is 
to  be  found  in  a  growing  sense  of  the  occult  power 
of  certain  numbers,  especially  odd  ones,  as  com- 
pared with  even.  The  superstitions  that  gath- 
ered in  the  ancient  world  around  the  supposed 
lucky  character  of  odd  numbers,  and  the  unlucky 
character  of  even  ones,  form  one  of  the  most  curi- 
ous chapters  in  history.  It  was  not  a  mere  conceit 
of  Virgil  that  led  him  to  say :  "  God  takes  delight 
in  odd  numbers."  He  was  voicing  a  deep-seated 
sentiment  that  had  come  down  from  prehistoric 
times.  Roman  life  and  tradition  was  full  of  it. 
The  calendar  was  arranged  in  obedience  to  it. 
"Five  wax  candles"  were  scrupulously  used  at 
weddings.  The  steps  leading  to  temples  dedicated 
to  religion  were  made  of  unequal  numbers,  as  if 
the  entrance  itself  to  sacred  places  might  thus  be 
consecrated  and  become  a  sort  of  via  sacra.  The 
number  three,  as  among  so  many  peoples,  was 
regarded  as  peculiarly  mystical  and  sacred. ^  The 
remarkable  division  of  the  Etruscan  temples  into 
three  parts  with  three  doors  was  apparently  the 
result  of  the  same  superstitious  feeling  concerning 
three  as  an  odd  or  lucky  and  in  a  peculiar  sense 
^  See  Granger's  Worship  of  the  Bomans,  p.  150. 


246  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

divine  number.  We  are  thus  prepared  to  join 
three  with  seven  as  peculiarly  sacred  in  the  eyes 
of  the  earhest  races.  But  other  numbers  were 
also  smgled  out  as  notably  significant.  The  Py- 
thagorean philosophy,  which  gives  us  the  earliest 
theory  of  number,  singles  out  3,  7,  and  10  as 
perhaps  the  most  occult  and  sacred  of  all,  — 10, 
though  an  even  number,  being  compounded  of  the 
first  four  digits  (1+2+3+4  =  10).  Three  and 
ten  were  specially  distinguished  as  the  perfect 
numbers,  —  three  because  it  contains  "  the  begin- 
ning, the  middle,  and  the  end,"  and  ten  because 
it  includes  in  itself  the  whole  essence  of  number. 
The  celebrated  "  Tetractys,"  or  quaternary  num- 
ber, which  was  made  up  of  the  addition  of  the  first 
four  digits,  equaling  ten,  had  a  mystical  mean- 
ing and  power,  as  being  "  the  source  and  root  of 
the  eternal  nature,"  and  hence  became  the  usual 
form  of  the  Pythagorean  oath.  It  is  plain  that 
the  Pythagoreans  closely  connected  numbers,  and 
especially  the  numbers  three  and  ten,  with  their 
whole  view  of  nature  and  of  the  gods.  As  we 
have  already  noted,  Aristotle  was  struck  with  this 
view,  and,  after  quoting  the  Pythagorean  dictum 
concerning  three  as  "  the  complete  or  perfect  num- 
ber," he  traces  this  perfection  to  nature^  as  if 
there  was  a  fundamental  threeness  in  the  very  na- 
ture of  things  and  hence  somehow  involved  in  the 
divine  nature  ;  and  to  this  fact  he  ascribes  certain 
trinitarian  features  in  the  rites  of  the  Greek  reli- 
gion.   How  much  is  to  be  made  of  this  remarkable 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    247 

passage  one  cannot  say.  Aristotle  makes  no  fur- 
ther allusion  to  the  subject;  but  it  certainly  con- 
tains evidence  that  somehow  the  triadal  principle 
as  revealed  in  nature  and  in  what  may  be  called 
the  divine  mathematics,  had  taken  deep  root  in  the 
ideas  of  men,  and  makes  it  easier  to  understand 
how  the  theory  of  triads  should  have  had  so  large 
a  place  in  the  history  of  religions.  Of  course 
these  Pythagorean  and  Aristotelian  philosophical 
theories  are  comparatively  late  in  the  history  of 
religion.  They  belong  to  what  may  be  called  the 
age  of  Ethnic  scholasticism.  The  Ethnic  trinities 
had  their  origin  in  the  spontaneous  mythologizing 
intuitions  of  man's  religious  nature  long  before 
philosophers  had  begun  to  theorize  on  primitive 
beliefs.  But  Greek  philosophy  always  worked  on 
the  religious  materials  which  lay  imbedded  in  the 
earlier  traditions,  and  it  cannot  be  doubted  that 
the  earliest  man  began  quickly  to  use  his  imagina- 
tion on  the  arithmetical  elements  of  the  divine 
order  exhibited  within  and  around  him.  How 
large  a  part  this  may  have  played  in  the  develop- 
ment of  the  triads  that  appear  already  formed 
when  the  light  of  history  dawns  it  is  impossible 
to  say.  Philosophy  had  its  rise  much  later.  But 
the  doctrine  of  numbers  in  their  mystical  signifi- 
cance was  certainly  an  attractive  one  to  the 
Greeks,  among  whom  philosophy  originated,  as  is 
illustrated  in  Pythagoreanism,  which  had  a  wide 
influence ;  and  it  was  out  of  Greek  philosophical 
traditions  that  Plotinus  drew  his  trinitarian  theory 


248  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

and  its  scholastic  conclusion  that  God  not  only 
existed  in  trinity  but  could  exist  in  no  other  way, 
either  in  duality  or  in  quaternity,  thus  reaching 
the  position  that  trinity  is  of  the  essence  of  the 
divine  being  and  hence  an  absolute  necessity. 

Turning  now  to  the  history  of  the  Christian 
trinity,  and  asking  ourselves  how  much  the  triple 
idea  had  to  do  with  its  development,  the  same 
obscurity  hangs  over  its  origin  as  was  the  case 
with  the  Ethnic  trinities.  Philosophy  did  not 
begin  to  enter  into  the  question  until  the  Nicene 
and  post-Nicene  age.  But  when  we  realize  that 
the  earliest  Christian  theologians  were  students 
and  admirers  of  Greek  philosophy,  and  especially 
revered  such  thinkers  as  Pythagoras  and  Plato 
and  Aristotle,  we  cannot  err  in  believing  that 
they  easily  sympathized  with  their  theories  of 
the  occult  relations  of  certain  numbers  such  as 
three  or  seven  or  ten  to  nature  and  religion  and 
God.  Pythagoras  seems  to  have  been  held  in 
gTcat  repute  by  the  Greek  Fathers  generally.  He 
is  quoted  or  referred  to  by  Justin  Martyr,  Clem- 
ent of  Alexandria,  and  Origen,  as  if  of  high 
authority,  and  Clement,  after  quoting  a  passage 
from  the  Pythagoreans,  describes  their  utterance  as 
"  written  through  the  inspiration  of  God."  The 
philosophical  trinitarianism  of  Athanasius  was 
based  on  the  assumption  that  trinity  was  as  ab- 
solutely essential  to  the  mode  of  existence  of  the 
Divine  Being  as  his  omnipotence  and  omniscience 
and  other  natural  attributes.     Such  an  idea  did 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    249 

not  spring  from  the  teacliings  of  Christ  or  even 
of  Paul.  Whence  did  it  arise,  if  not  in  the 
philosophical  scholasticism  of  the  Pythagorean- 
Platonic-Aristotelianism  of  which  Athanasius  drank 
so  deeply  ?  It  may  be  suggested  that  he  owed  it 
quite  as  much  to  the  Fourth  Gospel.  This  is 
indeed  possible,  but  the  writer  of  that  gospel 
drank  quite  as  deeply  of  the  same  spring.  This 
inclination  to  regard  threeness  as  an  essential 
feature  of  God  is  seen  in  Augustine's  use  of  trin- 
itarian  analogies  found  in  nature,  and  especially 
in  the  triple  division  of  the  faculties  of  the  soul. 
As  I  have  already  noted,  his  work  on  the  trinity 
is  largely  employed  in  tracing  such  analogies, 
and  thus  trying  to  prove  that  the  triple  character 
which  seems  to  pervade  God's  handiwork  must 
intimate  and  reveal  a  corresponding  triplicity  in 
himself.  It  was  reserved  for  a  much  later  age 
to  raise  the  question  already  raised  by  Plotinus, 
whether  God  could  exist  in  any  other  way  than  by 
a  trinity.  But  it  was  a  question  that  was  logically 
bound  to  arise  in  the  Christian  dogma  as  weU  as 
in  the  Ethnic.  Plotinus,  in  his  own  pantheistic 
way,  placed  the  scholastic  capstone  on  the  Greek 
trinitarianism  by  his  assertion  against  the  Gnostics 
that  the  Divine  Hypostases  could  he  no  more  and 
no  less  than  three,  and  the  same  curious  conclusion 
has  been  reached  by  our  present-day  theologians 
in  their  position  that  God  as  a  self-conscious  and 
social  being  must  exist  in  a  tri-personal  form.  Of 
the  bad  psychology  involved  in  what  is  called  the 


260  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

"  social  trinity  "  I  have  already  spoken.  I  here 
refer  to  it  to  illustrate  how  thoroughly  the  Ethnic 
tendency  to  find  triality  in  nature  and  in  deity  is 
continued  and  finally  summed  up  in  the  history  of 
the  Christian  trinity,  with  the  metaphysical  and 
transcendental  conclusion  that  trinity  is  the  abso- 
lutely necessary  form  of  the  divine  existence. 

But  we  must  look  deeper  for  the  most  radical 
resemblances  between  the  Ethnic  trinities  and  the 
Christian,  and  the  further  we  go,  the  more  remark- 
able the  resemblances  become.  Our  previous  stud- 
ies of  the  Ethnic  trinities  showed  how  deeply  seated 
in  the  earliest  religious  ideas  of  the  race  were  those 
of  generation  and  mediation.  Both  of  these  ideas 
underlie  the  oldest  mythologies  and  theogonies. 
As  the  generative  principle  was  the  foundation  of 
the  human  family,  it  was  naturally  transferred  to 
man's  conceptions  of  the  origin  of  the  gods.  The 
mythological  trinities  are  as  a  rule  composed  of 
male  and  female  divinities,  thus  laying  a  basis  for 
triads  consisting  of  husband,  wife,  and  child,  or, 
in  other  words,  of  father,  mother,  and  son  or 
daughter.  If,  as  sometimes  was  the  case,  the 
triad  was  wholly  masculine,  each  member  of  the 
triad  had  his  female  companion,  and  one  member 
was,  in  such  a  case,  usually  a  son  of  one  of  the 
pairs.  But  it  was  the  rule  rather  than  the  excep- 
tion that  a  goddess  was  a  member  of  the  triad, 
and  sometimes  even  two  out  of  the  three  were 
feminine,  as  for  example,  in  the  Homeric  trinity, 
Zeus,  Here,  and  Athene,  and  also  in  the  Koman 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    251 

Capitoline  triad,  Jupiter,  Juno,  and  Minerva.  In 
the  Egyptian  triad  of  Osiris,  Isis,  and  Horus,  Isis 
alone  is  feminine.  But  whatever  be  the  propor- 
tion of  the  masculine  and  feminine  elements  in 
the  mythological  Ethnic  trinities,  the  generative 
principle  is  fundamental  to  them  all.  There  is 
always  a  god  who  represents  fatherhood,  and  one 
who  represents  sonship  ;  and  if  motherhood  is  not 
directly  represented  in  the  triad  itself,  it  is  always 
in  the  background,  and  its  presence  is  implied.  It 
was  often  in  this  way  that  triads  became  enlarged 
to  four  deities  or  doubled  or  tripled.  Sometimes, 
for  instance,  the  masculine  triad  was  supplemented 
by  a  feminine  triad.  Thus  the  Ethnic  trinities 
were  really  supposed  to  be  families,  in  which  the 
three  essential  family  constituents  were  united  to- 
gether, —  father,  mother,  and  son.  The  influence 
of  philosophical  abstract  thought  upon  the  mytho- 
logical trinities  tended  to  eliminate  the  family 
conception,  or  at  least  to  break  up  its  symmetry 
and  completeness ;  yet  it  is  very  significant  that 
Plotinus,  who  gives  us  the  most  abstract  trinity 
that  was  ever  conceived,  foUows  Plato  in  calling 
his  first  principle,  "  The  One,"  by  the  name  of 
Father,  and  makes  generation  the  power  of  ema- 
nation through  which  his  metaphysical  trinity  is 
evolved.  If  his  to  ev,  6  vo9s,  -^  ifrvx^  are  too  pro- 
foundly impersonal  and  pantheistic  to  form  in  any 
true  sense  a  household,  they  at  least  are  brought 
into  metaphysical  relationship  by  the  generative 
law  on  which  the  household  rests. 


262  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

How,  now,  does  the  Christian  trinity  stand  re- 
lated to  the  generative  family  conception  ?  We 
need  not  go  far  for  the  answer.  Fatherhood  and 
sonship  are  its  vital  elements.  The  whole  eco- 
nomy of  salvation  in  the  Christian  religion,  as  it 
was  developed  in  the  course  of  the  first  three 
centuries,  was  siunmed  up  in  the  offices  of  God, 
the  Father  of  mankind,  and  of  his  Divine  Son, 
who  came  into  the  world  to  carry  out  his  Father's 
plan  of  grace.  Not  only  so,  but,  further,  the 
generative  principle  which  fatherhood  and  son- 
ship  involve,  if  these  names  are  truly  significant, 
and  not  merely  symbolic,  is  made  the  metaphy- 
sical corner-stone  of  the  fully  developed  Nicene 
trinitarianism.  In  fact,  the  controversies  of  the 
Nicene  age  revolved  around  the  question  whether 
the  Son  was  eternally  generated  from  the  Father 
or  was  merely  a  creature  like  other  created  beings. 
This  was  the  precise  issue  between  Arius  and 
Athanasius.  The  triumph  of  the  Athanasian  ho- 
moousian  doctrine  was  indeed  a  conservative  vic- 
tory in  more  senses  than  one ;  for  it  signalized  the 
retention  in  Christian  trinitarian  theology  of  that 
Ethnic  idea  which  had  its  origin  in  prehistoric 
ages,  and  seems  to  have  been  the  germ  of  all  the 
Ethnic  trinities  of  which  the  history  of  religions 
gives  account.  It  is  no  wonder  that  in  our  day 
there  should  have  been  a  strong  reaction  against 
a  form  of  trinitarianism  that  bears  so  plainly  the 
marks  of  its  mythological  parentage.  The  sharp, 
terse  wit  of   Emmons,  which  made   his  dictum, 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    263 

*' Eternal  generation  is  eternal  nonsense,"  so 
famous,  had  its  edge  and  point  in  the  query 
whether  there  could  be  any  generation  without 
a  beginning.  But  how  about  the  added  query 
whether  generation  itseK,  as  applied  to  God,  is  not 
a  crude  materialism.  Emmons  might  well  have 
given  a  double  edge  to  his  wit.  "  Eternal  genera- 
tion "  is  no  more  nonsensical  as  a  theological  spec- 
ulation concerning  God  than  temporal  generation ; 
and  the  retention  of  the  generation  idea,  whether 
with  or  without  the  adjective  "  eternal,"  in  theo- 
logical language,  only  shows  how  fundamental  it 
is  to  aU  trinitarian  forms  of  thought. 

But,  looking  at  the  interior  relations  of  the 
Christian  trinity,  two  features  of  it  seem  at  first 
sight  to  differentiate  it  quite  completely  from  the 
Ethnic  trinities,  namely,  the  absence  of  the  femU 
nine  element^  and  the  doctrine  of  the  procession 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  These  peculiar  features  are 
the  result  of  the  peculiar  historical  origin  of  the 
Christian  dogma.  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  around 
whom  the  Christian  trinity  grew,  was  himself  a 
man  of  Jewish  stock  and  parentage.  He  had  a 
human  mother  as  well  as  father.  In  fact,  while 
legend  played  around  the  story  of  his  birth  and  at 
length  invested  him  with  a  divine  paternity,  no 
question  was  ever  raised  as  to  Mary's  true  mother- 
hood ;  so  that  when  Christ  began  to  be  looked  at 
as  of  divine  nature,  the  true  Son  of  God,  it  was 
impossible  to  complete  the  trinity  with  Mary,  as 
would  naturally  have  been  the  case.     The  legend 


264  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

of  the  miraculous  conception  of  Mary,  wMch  soon 
attached  itself  to  that  of  Jesus,  paved  the  way  for 
the  later  deoroKo^  dogma,  namely,  that  she  was  the 
true  mother  of  God ;  and  this  in  turn  laid  the  basis 
of  her  own  divineness  which  culminated  in  the 
Mariolatry  of  the  Middle  Ages.  But  the  dogma 
of  Mary  was  of  comparatively  slow  growth.  Mean- 
while the  vacant  place  in  the  trinity  was  left  unfilled. 
These  historical  facts  help  explain  the  slowness 
and  fluctuating  character  of  the  evolution  of  the 
third  person.  The  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit  as 
a  separate  person,  and  as  the  third  member  of  the 
trinity,  was  really  a  sort  of  makeshift  or  accident. 
From  our  historical  standpoint  of  the  comparative 
study  of  religions,  it  becomes  more  easily  explicable 
why  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God  became  separated 
from  God  himself,  and  was  added  to  the  Father 
and  the  Son  to  form  a  trinity.  It  was  a  sort  of 
historical  necessity  that  the  vacant  place  should 
be  filled,  and  thus  a  duad  became  a  triad.  The 
Ethnic  trinities  were  so  many  signal  lights  to  re- 
mind Christian  theologians  that  their  own  trinity 
was  yet  incomplete.  I  would  not  suggest  that 
Justin  Martyr,  Irenaeus,  and  Origen  were  directly 
conscious  of  such  a  trinitarian  influence  from 
Ethnic  tradition,  but  the  very  air  around  them 
was  full  of  trinitarian  voices.  However  this  may 
have  been,  a  curious  light  is  shed  on  the  substitu- 
tion of  the  Holy  Spirit  for  the  natural  third  per- 
son, namely,  the  divine  mother  of  Jesus,  in  an 
extract  which  has  been  preserved,  from  the  Gospel 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    255 

of  the  Hebrews,  —  an  early  gospel  which  after- 
wards came  to  be  regarded  as  heretical,  and  thus 
passed  out  of  use  and  is  largely  lost.  In  this 
gospel,  in  the  account  of  the  baptism,  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  represented  as  saying  to  Christ :  "  Thou 
art  my  first-born  son,"  and  further  on,  in  the  ac- 
count of  the  temptation,  Christ  himself  is  made  to 
say :  "  My  mother,  the  Holy  Spirit,  lately  took 
me  by  one  of  my  hairs  and  carried  me  to  the  great 
mountain  Tabor."  Here  appears  the  feminine 
element,  so  fundamental  in  all  the  Ethnic  trinities, 
striving  to  assert  itself  on  Christian  soil.  It  was 
the  Ebionitic  and  heretical  character  of  this  Gospel 
of  the  Hebrews  that  may  have  prevented  the  Holy 
Spirit  from  appearing  in  the  Trinity  as  the  divine 
mother  of  Christ.  There  was  indeed  one  difficulty 
which  could  not  easily  be  surmounted,  namely,  the 
substitution  of  the  Holy  Spirit  for  Mary,  the 
historical  mother  of  Jesus,  who  was  growing  more 
and  more  sacred  in  Christian  tradition.  Then 
there  was  a  stiU  further  difficulty.  In  the  early 
legendary  account  of  Christ's  birth,  which  was 
accepted  as  historical  fact,  the  Holy  Spirit  was 
made  the  masculine  agent  in  Christ's  conception 
(Matt.  i.  18,  20  ;  Luke  i.  35).  The  Gospel  of  the 
Hebrews  must  have  followed  a  different  legendary 
tradition.  Under  such  circumstances  it  is  not 
surprising  that  the  feminine  element  failed  of 
being  represented  in  the  Christian  trinity.  But 
the  later  history  of  the  cultus  and  dogma  of  Mary, 
the  so-called  "  Virgin-mother,"  gives  added  evi- 


256  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

dence  that  the  loss  of  the  feminine  element  has 
always  been  felt  in  the  Christian  consciousness. 
The  popularity  of  the  cultus  of  Mary,  and  the  rapid 
growth  of  the  dogma  of  her  bodily  assumption  and 
enthronement  in  heaven  at  Christ's  right  hand — 
where  she  becomes  the  chief  intercessor  for  man, 
thus  taking  the  place  of  Christ,  her  Son,  who  has 
now  largely  taken  the  place  of  the  Father  as  Lord 
and  Judge  —  vividly  indicate  how  strongly  the 
feminine  element,  as  representative  of  grace  and 
mercy  in  God,  has  always  appealed  to  the  human 
heart.  There  is  no  more  realistic  and  pathetic 
chapter  in  Christian  history  than  that  which  re- 
cords the  gradual  divinization  of  Mary  the  mother 
of  Jesus.  In  the  second  century  she  was  the  "  Vir- 
gin-mother." In  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries  she 
became  the  ^cotkoos,  or  mother  of  God.  Already 
she  has  been  transformed  into  a  semi-divine  being. 
Then  legend  followed  legend  to  prepare  her  for 
her  new  sphere  and  office  in  the  heavenly  world. 
Her  miraculous  birth  had  already  taken  its  place 
in  the  post-apostolic  apocryphal  traditions.  Her 
miraculous  bodily  assumption  from  the  grave  to 
heaven  was  only  a  logical  afterpiece.  Then  fol- 
lowed her  coronation  by  the  Father  or  the  Son  and 
her  installation  as  "  Queen  of  heaven."  The 
Christian  art  of  the  Middle  Ages,  employed  to 
decorate  the  great  churches  and  stimulate  the 
faith  of  the  people  that  thronged  them  on  festival 
days,  is  fuU  of  paintings  illustrative  of  this  won- 
derful  historical  evolution.     Only  one  step  fur- 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    257 

ther  remained.  That  was,  to  invest  her  with 
the  trinitarian  title  which  her  functions  already 
involved. 

It  is  noticeable  in  all  this  process  of  the  deifica- 
tion of  Mary,  that  the  dogma  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is 
losing  recognition.  It  remains,  indeed,  in  the  creeds, 
but  it  has  gone  out  of  the  practical  faith  of  men, 
—  as  is  witnessed  by  the  innumerable  pictures  in 
the  churches,  which  represented  the  popular  beliefs 
and  especially  the  religious  conceptions  and  rites 
that  fed  their  spiritual  Hf e.  The  Holy  Spirit  is 
not  whoUy  absent  from  these  paintings,  but  every- 
where the  cultus  of  Mary,  "  Our  Holy  Mother," 
and  "  Queen  of  heaven,"  is  made  the  centre  of  at- 
traction and  worship,  rivaling  and  more  and 
more  uniting  itself  with  that  of  Christ,  her  Son. 
Nothing  is  more  irresistible  than  the  logic  of  a 
historical  evolution.  A  religious  intuition  of  the 
heart  is  surely  destined  sooner  or  later  to  become 
a  dogma  of  intellectual  belief.  A  cultus  at  last 
becomes  a  creed.  It  is  understood  on  Catholic 
authority  that  "  a  congress  was  called  in  the  city 
of  Rome,  some  time  since,  for  the  purpose  of  pla- 
cing the  worship  of  the  '  Holy  Mother  '  in  a  more 
distinct  and  authoritative  position  among  the  arti- 
cles of  belief  and  practice."  What  the  result  of  this 
movement  was  has  not  transpired.  But  it  was  not 
the  first  effort  in  this  direction.  More  than  thirty 
years  ago  Albert  Reville,  the  present  rector  of  the 
University  of  Paris,  declared,  in  a  small  but  nota- 
ble book,  "  Histoire  du  dogme  de  la  Divinite  de 


258  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

Jesus  Christ :  '*  "  More  than  one  serious  attempt 
has  already  been  made  in  the  Ultramontane  camp 
to  join  in  some  way  Mary  to  the  Trinity,  and,  if 
Mariolatry  continues  longer,  it  will  come  to  pass.'* 
In  the  light  of  such  facts,  a  remark  of  Renan,  in 
one  of  his  essays,  having  in  mind  the  tendencies  of 
modern  Catholic  Christianity,  has  a  new  signifi- 
cance :  "  Mary  has  entered  of  full  right  into  the 
Trinity  ;  she  far  excels  the  Holy  Spirit.  She  com- 
pletes the  divine  family,  for  it  would  have  been 
a  marvelous  thing  had  the  womanly  element  in 
Christianity  failed  to  succeed  in  mounting  to  the 
very  bosom  of  God."  Such  pictures  as  "  The  In- 
coronata,"  where  Mary,  placed  between  the  Father 
and  the  Son,  receives  the  crown  from  the  former 
and  the  homage  of  the  latter,  or  where  Christ, 
seated  at  Mary's  side,  puts  the  crown  on  her  head, 
or  as  "  The  Last  Judgment,"  in  which  Christ  and 
Mary  sit  side  by  side  in  separate  glories,  as  if 
sharing  together  the  offices  of  judgment  and  mercy, 
—  such  pictures  may  seem  to  us  Protestants  super- 
stitious and  even  blasphemous,  but  it  must  not  be 
forgotten  that  they  testify  truly  to  the  religious 
faith  of  the  whole  Christian  church  down  to  the 
sixteenth  century,  and  they  declare  more  vividly 
than  words  can  how  deeply  fixed  in  the  human 
soul  is  the  sentiment  of  its  need  of  the  divine 
mercy,  and  how  intimately  related  is  the  Christian 
trinity  in  its  radical  affirmations  to  its  Ethnic 
elders.  Nor  let  us  Protestants  be  too  critically  in- 
clined towards  what  may  seem  to  us  superstitious 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    259 

features  of  Catholic  faith.  Are  our  skirts  quite  clear 
of  similar  superstitions  ?  Is  not  the  cult  of  Mary 
herself  growing  among  us  ?  Is  she  not  the  Virgin- 
mother  somehow  set  apart  from  all  other  woman- 
kind ?  Not  long  ago  I  heard  a  Protestant  minister 
of  New  England  ancestry  and  faith,  and  who 
abides  in  regular  standing  in  the  Congregational 
brotherhood,  refer,  in  no  ironical  fashion,  but  with 
the  utmost  seriousness,  to  "  the  divine  madonnaJ*^ 
Let  who  will  cast  a  stone  at  this  distinguished 
Congregational  preacher.  For  myself,  I  am  not 
a  Catholic,  nor  am  I  catholically  inclined,  but  my 
historical  studies  have  only  deepened  my  feeling 
of  charity  and  even  sympathy  for  every  sincere 
religious  belief,  though  it  may  have  its  source  in 
unhistorical  and  superstitious  traditions;  for  I 
have  learned  how  tenacious  is  the  grasp  of  a  sin- 
cere though  ignorant  faith  on  the  objects  of  its 
trust,  and  how  affiliated  are  all  such  objects,  when 
search  is  made  for  their  historical  roots,  in  the 
common  religious  nature  of  man. 

The  absence,  then,  originally,  of  the  feminine 
element  in  the  Christian  dogma  of  the  trinity  does 
not  indicate  any  radical  difference  in  its  internal 
character,  when  compared  with  that  of  the  Ethnic 
trinities.  Fortuitous  historical  circumstances  pre- 
vented its  admission  for  a  while,  but  the  generative 
principle,  which  was  as  fundamental  to  the  Chris- 
tian dogma  as  to  the  Ethnic,  really  required  it, 
and  the  development  of  the  cultus  of  Mary  was 
the  natural  result.     In  the  Catholic  church,  which 


260  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

historically  represents  the  Nicene  and  post-Nicene 
Christianity,  the  dogma  and  rites  of  Mary  have 
become  a  vital  part  of  its  system.  The  Protestant 
revolt  was  directed  rather  against  rites  than  dog- 
mas. Hence  it  was  that  Mary  was  thrown  down 
from  her  lofty  pedestal.  But  the  old  dogmas  and 
creeds  logically  include  the  doctrine  and  cultus  of 
Mary  which  grew  spontaneously  in  the  Middle 
Ages.  If  those  creeds  are  true,  and  Mary  was  the 
real  mother  of  the  God-man,  then  the  special  honor 
and  cultus  of  Mary  is  defensible.  Hence  it  is  that 
conservative  Protestantism  to-day,  in  its  reactionary 
tendencies,  is  taking  more  and  more  kindly  to  a 
sort  of  haK-and-half  Mariology.  Surely,  if  Jesus 
is  indeed  God  himself,  and  Mary  was  his  virgin- 
mother,  why  should  she  not  be  honored  as  such, 
and  be  even  entitled  to  a  seat  at  her  divine  Son's 
right  hand  in  glory  ?  The  logic  of  history  rarely 
fails.  There  is  in  it  a  divine  method  and  provi- 
dence. It  is  my  profound  conviction  that  the  pre- 
diction of  Reville  concerning  the  tendencies  in  the 
Catholic  church  towards  the  inclusion  of  Mary 
in  the  Christian  trinity  will  ultimately  be  verified, 
and  my  conclusion,  as  a  historical  observer,  is 
equally  clear  that  those  Protestants  who  are  de- 
voted to  the  old  Catholic  dogmas  must  finally 
reach  —  though  the  steps  taken  towards  it  may  be 
uncertain  and  slow  —  the  same  goal. 

Turning  now  to  the  other  point  raised,  namely, 
the  Christian  dogma  of  the  procession  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  it  is  to  be  noted  that  it  does  not  appear  in 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    261 

the  creeds  until  the  fourth  century.  The  Nicene 
Creed  of  325  simply  alludes  to  the  Holy  Spirit, 
without  constructing  any  dogma  about  it.  This 
shows  that  no  theological  discussion  had  yet  arisen 
on  this  point.  Whether  the  Holy  Spirit  was  a 
person  or  only  an  influence  was  not  quite  clear. 
As  late  as  the  latter  part  of  the  fourth  century 
Gregory  Nazianzen  regarded  the  question  as  unset- 
tled and  not  essential  to  orthodoxy.  What,  then, 
was  the  common  view  of  the  Holy  Spirit's  relation 
to  God  ?  Plainly  it  was  one  of  derivation  or  ema- 
nation, analogous  to  that  of  the  second  person,  or 
Son.  But  why  was  it  that  the  theory  of  genera- 
tion is  not  applied  also  to  the  Holy  Spirit  as  well 
as  to  the  Son?  The  answer  seems  clear.  Its 
clue  is  given  in  the  Fourth  Gospel.  Here  is  found 
for  the  first  time  the  theory  of  the  Paraclete 
(Comforter),  and  of  his  procession  from  the  Fa^ 
ther.  The  proem  of  that  gospel  had  set  forth, 
after  the  manner  of  Philo,  the  theory  of  the  Logos 
of  God,  the  only  begotten  Son  of  the  Father,  and 
had  identified  this  preexistent  Logos  with  Jesus  of 
Nazareth.  Generation  and  procession  are  simply 
two  forms  of  derivation  from  God.  No  doubt  the 
phrase  in  John  xv.  was  rhetorical  rather  than 
theological;  but  though  it  slumbered  for  nearly 
two  centuries,  it  was  at  last  caught  up  when  con- 
troversy began  to  arise  as  to  the  precise  relation 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  God.  It  is  remarkable  that 
when  the  doctrine  of  the  third  person  is  first  set 
forth  theologically,  in  the  creeds  of  the  middle  of 


262  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

the  fourth  century,  express  allusion  is  made  to  the 
language  of  John  xv.  and  to  the  term  "  Paraclete  " 
(Comforter).  Athanasius,  who  became  the  great- 
est defender  of  the  homoousian  character  not  only 
of  the  second  person  but  also  of  the  third,  rested 
his  defense  primarily  on  the  Fourth  Gospel.  There 
can  be  no  historical  doubt,  therefore,  that  the 
Fourth  Gospel  is  responsible  for  that  peculiar  the- 
ory of  the  third  person  which  became  incorporated 
in  the  so-called  Constantinopolitan  amendment  of 
the  Nicene  Creed,  and  has  ever  since  been  retained 
as  a  fixed  shibboleth  of  orthodoxy.  I  will  not  here 
stop  to  consider  the  light  shed  by  this  bit  of  his- 
tory on  the  question  of  the  authorship  and  date  of 
the  Fourth  Gospel.  What  is  plain,  at  all  events, 
is  that  the  author  of  that  gospel  derived  his  trini- 
tarian  ideas  concerning  the  eternal  generation  of 
the  Son  and  the  procession  of  the  Holy  Spirit  from 
Alexandrian  Philonic  sources,  and  that  their  ac- 
ceptance by  Christian  theologians  in  the  third  and 
fourth  centuries  was  due  to  the  fact  that  the 
authorship  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  was  attributed  to 
John,  the  Galilean  apostle.  The  question  here 
arises  whether  the  language  placed  on  the  lips  of 
Christ  concerning  the  Paraclete  and  his  procession 
from  the  Father  was  ever  really  spoken  by  him. 
Certainly  it  is  remarkable  that  no  such  language 
can  be  found  in  the  Synoptic  gospels.  The  very 
word  "  Paraclete,"  or  Comforter,  is  clearly  of  Greek 
origin,  and  is  traceable  to  the  same  Philo  who  gave 
the  Greek  term  "  Logos  "  to  Christian  theology.    In 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    263 

fact,  the  two  words  belong  to  the  vocabulary  of  a 
common  Greek  philosophy.  Christ  taught  no 
such  Logos  or  Paraclete  doctrine,  unless  we  accept 
the  apostolicity  of  the  Fourth  Gospel.  There  are 
stiU  those  who  are  ready  to  defend  such  apostoli- 
city and  to  hold  that  Christ  spoke  the  very  words 
of  the  long  discourses  and  prayer  in  chapters 
xiv.-xvii.  But  the  weight  of  critical  authority 
more  and  more  settles  itself  on  a  substantial  agree- 
ment with  the  conclusions  of  Professor  B.  W. 
Bacon,  in  his  recently  published  volume :  "  An 
Introduction  to  the  New  Testament."  Professor 
Bacon  holds  that  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  a  post-apos- 
tolic writing  by  an  unknown  author  who  gathered 
the  materials  from  composite  sources,  employing 
"  trustworthy  data  and  genuine  logia,'"  but  "  ex- 
panding them  into  dialectic  discourses,"  "in  a 
manner  wholly  incompatible  with  the  clear  histor- 
ical recollection  of  an  eyewitness."  Professor 
Bacon  further  adds  :  "  With  all  due  allowance  it 
is  impossible  to  regard  the  set  discourses  of  John, 
as  a  whole,  as  other  than  literary  compositions  by 
the  author  (unknown)  of  the  Johannine  Epistles." 
I  am  in  substantial  accord  with  these  conclusions ; 
though  I  must  add  that  I  regard  them  as  quite 
conservative,  and  it  is  my  decided  feeling  that  his- 
torical criticism  in  its  progress  will  grow  more  and 
more  hesitant  about  allowing  even  so  much.  I 
think  Professor  Bacon  has  yielded  quite  as  much 
to  the  genuineness  of  original  logia  in  the  set  dis- 
courses as  the  evidence  warrants.     He  weU  says : 


264  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

"  Few  will  deny  that  in  this  gospel  the  prerogative 
of  the  ancient  historian  to  place  in  the  mouth  of  his 
characters  discourses  reflecting  his  own  idea  of  what 
were  suitable  to  the  occasion  has  been  used  to  the 
limit."  1  The  bearing  of  this  critical  conclusion  on 
the  point  before  us  is  clear.  If  the  language  of 
John  XV.  25  cannot  be  regarded  as  that  of  Christ 
himself,  but  only  an  intei"pretation  of  what  a  writer 
of  the  second  century  supposed  to  be  the  spirit  of 
his  teaching,  and  in  accord  with  the  literary  habit 
of  his  day  put  into  his  mouth,  it  is  impossible  to 
quote  them  as  a  truly  gospel  foundation  for  the 
article  of  the  creed  on  the  third  person.  Here, 
also,  it  is  important  to  remember  that  the  Fourth 
Gospel  makes  no  figure  in  early  history  till  after 
the  middle  of  the  second  century,  and  that  the 
doctrine  of  the  Paraclete  does  not  appear  till  near 
the  end  of  that  century,  —  a  strange  thing  cer- 
tainly, if  the  Fourth  Gospel  was  apostolic  and  in 
the  hands  of  the  apostolic  Christians.  What  the 
form  of  the  Niceno-Constantinopolitan  creed,  as 
regards  the  third  person,  would  have  been,  had  the 
Fourth  Gospel  not  been  written,  cannot  of  course 
be  determined.  Without  it,  certainly,  there  would 
have  been  no  doctrine  of  the  Paraclete  as  a  distinct 
person.  Philo,  indeed,  used  the  term,  but  applied 
it  to  the  Logos,  as  he  did  the  term  mediator. 
To  the  last  discourses  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  must 

1  For  my  own  historical  judgment  on  the  general  question,  see 
Appendix  A,  on  "The  Johannine  Problem,"  in  A  Critical  His- 
tory of  the  Evolution  of  Trinitarianism. 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    265 

we  look,  and  to  them  alone,  for  the  historical  ori- 
gin of  the  dogma  of  the  procession  of  the  Holy 
Spirit. 

We  are  now  in  a  position  to  be  able  to  deter- 
mine quite  clearly  what  the  real  meaning  of 
"  procession  "  was,  when  adopted  into  the  creed. 
Philo  and  the  author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  were 
Alexandrian  Platonists,  but  representing  the  ten- 
dency which  was  now  growing  towards  the  New 
Platonic  monism.  The  key  word,  as  we  have 
seen,  of  that  philosophy  was  evolution,  or  deriva- 
tion. AU  things  proceeded,  in  one  way  or  other, 
from  the  one  God,  whether  by  generation  or  some 
other  form  of  evolution.  "  The  Paraclete  who 
proceedeth  from  the  Father "  is  genuine  Greek 
Platonic  language,  and  can  bear  but  one  interpre- 
tation. Athanasius  and  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  who 
had  more  influence  than  any  others  in  the  final 
formation  of  the  completed  creed,  were  thoroughly 
versed  in  the  Platonic  philosophy.  The  difference 
to  them  between  the  mode  of  derivation  of  the 
second  person  and  the  third  was  simply  one  of 
form,  not  of  substance.  Generation  and  proces- 
sion were  essentially  the  same,  and  the  persons 
thus  derived,  though  seemingly  in  different  ways, 
were  equally  homoousio%  and  in  the  same  sense 
divine.  Thus  the  apparent  difference  between  the 
Ethnic  trinities  and  the  Christian  trinity  in  the 
matter  of  the  form  of  derivation  of  the  third 
person  fades  into  a  purely  superficial  distinction ; 
and,  in  this  case,  as  in  the  case  of  the  absence  of 


266  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

the  feminine  element,  circumstances  entirely  for- 
tuitous seem  to  have  prevented  the  Christian 
trinitarianism  from  being  based  on  the  generation 
family  principle  throughout. 

But  it  is  the  mediation  element,  after  all,  that 
binds  the  Ethnic  trinities  and  the  Christian  trinity 
in  closest  and  most  intimate  relationship.  This 
fact  is  so  patent  that  I  need  not  dwell  upon  it  at 
any  length.  The  whole  Christian  trinity  and  aU 
the  doctrines  that  hang  upon  it,  have  as  their 
very  centre  and  crown  the  divine  mediatorship 
of  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  who  was  sent  by  his 
Father  on  the  mission  of  healing  the  alienation 
wrought  by  sin,  and  reuniting  God  and  his  human 
creatures  in  one  moral  kingdom.  The  whole 
scheme  of  salvation  circles  around  the  word 
/Aco-tTiys,  introduced  into  the  Christian  theology  by 
Paul,  and  the  kindred  word  A.oyos,  derived  from 
Philo  and  Greek  philosophy.  Add  the  word 
irapaKXrjTo?  (Paraclete),  and  in  these  three  Greek 
words,  all  directly  Philonic,  and  more  indirectly  Pla- 
tonic, we  have  the  keynote  not  only  to  Christian 
trinitarianism,  but  also  to  Christian  theology  in  its 
whole  range.  I  scarcely  need  add  that  mediatorship 
is  equally  the  keynote  of  the  Ethnic  trinities.  In 
fact,  it  was  plainly  the  strongest  bond  of  the  Ethnic 
trinitarianism,  working  more  efficiently  than  all 
others  to  preserve  its  substance  and  form,  exposed 
as  it  was  constantly  to  the  disintegrating  effects  of 
polytheism  on  the  one  hand  and  pantheism  on  the 
other.    The  great  question  of  religion  and  religious 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    267 

faith  has  always  been  from  the  beginning  of  time, 
how  man  shall  be  able  to  enter  into  such  relations 
of  amity  and  communion  with  God  as  shall  insure 
his  help  and  favor.  To  establish  such  a  basis  of 
religious  trust  has  been  the  end  of  every  religion 
that  history  gives  any  account  of.  And,  as  we 
have  seen,  more  and  more  prominent  in  the  his- 
tories of  the  Ethnic  religions  has  grown  the  medi- 
ative  principle.  The  terms  "Father"  and  "  Son," 
"Mediator,"  "Messenger,"  "Friend  of  Man," 
"  Savior,"  are  by  no  means  peculiar  to  Chris- 
tianity. They  are  found  scattered  over  the  sacred 
books  of  the  East,  and  later  in  the  West,  in 
Greek  mythologies  and  philosophies,  until  at  last, 
in  the  complete  New  Platonism  of  Plotinus  and 
Proclus,  they  reach  their  height  of  moral  and 
religious  significance,  and  remind  us  that  we  have 
entered  somehow  into  a  truly  Christian  atmos- 
phere and  faith.  When  we  read  of  Sosiosh,  the 
"  benevolent "  one  and  "  savior,"  and  of  Mithra, 
the  "mediator,"  in  Zoroastrianism,  of  Krishna, 
the  incarnate  god-man,  in  Hindooism,  of  ^scula- 
pius,  the  "  a-oiT-qp  "  or  "  savior  "  in  Greek  religious 
rites,  we  are  indeed  made  to  feel  that  we  are  "  not 
far  from  the  kingdom  of  God."  The  more  closely 
the  Ethnic  religions  are  studied,  the  more  deeply 
one  realizes  that  the  very  foundations  of  the  Eth- 
nic trinities  were  laid  in  the  need  felt  by  the  hu- 
man heart  of  some  favorable  and  friendly  medium 
between  weak  man  and  those  heavenly  powers  that 
rule  earth  and  sea  and  sky  and  the  nether  world 


268  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

below.  Whichever  member  of  a  trinity,  whether 
Father  or  Son  or  Mother,  becomes  in  human  ap- 
prehension the  mediating  friend  of  man,  at  once 
he  or  she  is  made  the  most  prominent  and  popular 
object  of  worship  and  sacrificial  rites.  The  very- 
development  of  some  of  the  Ethnic  trinities  seems 
to  have  come  about  along  this  mediating  line. 
The  need  of  a  go-between  to  mediate  with  the 
highest  and  most  distant  deity  led  to  the  evolution 
of  a  second  person  who  as  a  son  of  that  high- 
est deity  could  be  the  bearer  to  him  of  human 
prayers  and  sacrifices  and  offerings.  It  was  the 
need  still  felt  of  another  go-between  to  fill  the 
chasm  not  wholly  closed  between  the  Son  and 
man,  that  sometimes  led  to  another  addition,  thus 
making  a  trinity  complete.  The  function  of  "  in- 
tercessor" was  strongly  marked  in  some  of  the 
Oriental  cults.  The  investigation  of  the  analo- 
gies furnished  by  several  of  these  religions  has 
been  a  fascinating  subject  of  late  with  Oriental 
scholars.  A  competent  foreign  critic,  reviewing 
one  of  these  attempts  to  find  historical  analogies 
between  one  of  the  Babylonian  triads  with  its 
"  intercessor,"  and  one  of  the  Zoroastrian  trinities 
with  its  "  mediator,"  while  refusing  to  accept  the 
evidence  as  full  proof  of  any  actual  borrowing, 
concludes :  "  Man,  terrified  at  finding  himself 
before  the  power  of  the  divine  majesty,  places 
intermediaries  between  his  God  and  himself,  who, 
being  divinized  in  their  turn,  demand  still  other 
intermediaries  "    ("  Kevue  de   I'histoire  des   reli- 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  RESEMBLANCES    269 

gions,"  1898,  i.  240).  A  prolonged  study  of  the 
Christian  and  Ethnic  religions  has  convinced  me 
that  this  critic's  words  bring  us  to  the  fountain 
head,  not  only  of  all  the  trinities  that  have  ever 
been  evolved,  but  also  of  all  the  various  religions 
that  have  been  developed  around  them.  Other 
causes  contributed  their  share  of  influence,  but 
more  influential  than  all  has  been  this  most  radi- 
cal of  human  religious  instincts,  with  its  inex- 
tinguishable fears  and  hopes. 


CHAPTER  III 

INTERNAL   RELATIONS  —  DIFFERENCES 

In  our  consideration  of  the  internal  resem- 
blances that  are  visible  in  a  comparison  of  the 
Ethnic  and  Christian  trinities,  we  had  occasion  to 
note  several  differences  that  seemed  at  first  sight 
to  be  of  a  radical  character,  but  on  closer  exami- 
nation resolved  themselves  into  superficial  features 
that  only  served  to  make  the  resemblances  more 
striking.  Such  were  the  absence  of  the  feminine 
element,  and  the  derivation  by  procession  rather 
than  generation  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  We  have 
now  to  notice  other  differences  which  do  not  so 
easily  yield  to  critical  examination.  Attention 
has  already  been  called  to  the  historical  origin  of 
the  Christian  trinity  as  an  outgrowth  of  faith  in 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  as  the  promised  Messiah.  The 
raising  of  Christ  from  the  position  of  a  man  to  that 
of  a  divine  being  is  the  historical  starting-point  of 
the  Christian  trinity.  Here  is  a  point  of  radical 
difference  between  the  Christian  trinity  and  aU 
the  Ethnic  trinities.  No  Ethnic  trinity  centre^ 
in  or  starts  from  a  man.  If  Zoroaster  was  a  his- 
torical personage,  he  never  became  a  member  of 
a  trinity,  though  in  later  legend  he  was  invested 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  — DIFFERENCES    271 

with  semi-divine  functions.  Gautama  was  also 
raised  in  later  Buddhistic  tradition  to  the  place  of 
a  god,  as  an  incarnation  of  Buddha ;  but  no  trinity 
of  di\dne  persons  grew  up  around  him.  Moham- 
medanism is  a  Semitic  religion  closely  akin  to 
Judaism,  but  though  Mohammed  proclaimed  him- 
self a  reformer  and  prophet  like  Moses  and  Christ, 
he  never  was  raised  by  his  followers  to  a  divine 
rank.  All  the  mythological  trinities  had  their 
origin  in  the  religious  imagination  of  the  early 
man.  So  the  philosophical  trinities,  such  as  the 
Hindoo  and  the  New  Platonic,  were  the  offspring 
of  the  speculative  reason.  Plotinus  became  in- 
deed a  sort  of  divine  man  in  the  eyes  of  his  admir- 
ing disciples,  but  he  was  himself  the  sole  author 
of  the  Plotinian  trinity,  and  it  never  occurred  to 
the  most  speculative  of  his  followers  to  introduce 
the  name  of  their  master  into  a  trinity  of  such 
transcendental  abstractions  as  "  The  One,  the  In- 
telligence, and  the  Soul."  It  is  true  that  the  early 
Christian  Fathers  grazed  on  Ethnic  soil  in  laying 
the  philosophic  foimdations  of  the  Christian  trin- 
itarian  dogma,  but  it  remains  no  less  true  that 
without  Jesus  Christ  there  would  have  been  no 
Christian  trinity,  and  that  he  has  remained  its 
true  theological  centre  throughout  aU  its  history. 
It  has  even  been  made  the  great  apologetical  argu- 
ment for  the  truth  of  the  Christian  trinity  that  it 
had  a  true  historical  origin,  while  aU  Ethnic  trin- 
ities are  claimed  to  be  unhistorical  creations  of 
fancy  or  philosophy.     I  have  already  shown  how 


272  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

wanting  in  historical  verity  this  position  is.  The 
evolution  of  the  Ethnic  trinities  is  as  much  a  mat- 
ter of  history  as  is  that  of  the  Christian  dogma. 
There  is,  indeed,  one  element  of  truth  in  the 
Christian  apology.  Jesus  Christ  was  a  historical 
person,  and  he  not  only  became  the  historical 
founder  of  a  new  religion,  but  he  also  was  raised 
after  his  death,  in  the  faith  of  his  disciples,  to  a 
divine  rank,  and  to  membership  in  a  trinity  of 
divine  beings.  But  these  historical  facts  concern- 
ing the  evolution  of  a  trinity  out  of  the  Jewish 
monotheism  do  not  make  the  Christian  trinity  it- 
self, as  a  religious  dogma,  a  historical  eternal 
truth,  any  more  than  the  corresponding  facts  con- 
cerning the  evolution  of  the  Ethnic  trinities  prove 
them  to  be  valid  statements  concerning  the  nature 
of  God.  A  fatal  fallacy  is  involved  in  this  apolo- 
getical  argument.  It  assumes  as  historical  fact 
what  should  first  be  proved,  namely,  that  Jesus  of 
Nazareth  was  really  born  of  a  virgin  by  an  imme- 
diate act  of  divine  power,  making  unnecessary  the 
cooperation  of  Christ's  putative  father,  and  fur- 
ther, that  this  miraculous  birth  contained  within 
itseK  a  real  divine  incarnation  of  God.  But  such 
proof  has  never  been  furnished,  and  in  the  nature 
of  things  cannot  be.  Were  it  capable  of  being 
given,  it  would  involve  the  utter  and  fatal  sub- 
version of  God's  own  universal  and  eternal  laws, 
and  of  those  ultimate  principles  on  which  human 
science  and  history  rest.  But,  fortunately,  no 
such  conflict  between  science  and  faith  can  arise. 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  DIFFERENCE^»§4ialS2Si^^ 

The  only  direct  human  witness  would  be  Mary 
the  mother  of  Jesus  herself,  and  she  never  ap- 
peared in  evidence.  Further,  historical  criticism 
has  made  clear  the  legendary  character  of  the  tra- 
ditions that  slowly  gathered  around  the  birth  and 
infancy  of  Jesus.  While,  then,  it  is  true  that 
Christ  as  a  man  is  the  historical  starting-point  of 
the  Christian  trinity,  it  is  not  true  that  the  dogma 
itself  any  more  rests  upon  historical  grounds,  as 
an  article  of  religious  faith,  than  the  Ethnic  trini- 
ties. All  trinitarian  doctrines  are  divisible  into 
two  classes,  the  mythological  and  the  philosophi- 
cal. The  Christian  trinity  belongs  to  the  latter 
class.  Such  a  doctrine  of  God  cannot  be  con- 
founded with  any  historical  human  being,  such  as 
Jesus  of  Nazareth.  Christ  himseK  was  a  mono- 
theist,  not  a  trinitarian.  Paul,  Justin  Martyr, 
and  Origen,  who  may  be  styled  the  three  chief 
originators  of  Christian  trinitarianism,  drew  their 
theological  ideas  from  Greek  philosophy.  The  real 
difference,  therefore,  between  the  Ethnic  trinities 
and  the  Christian  on  this  point  dwindles  to  the 
single  fact  that  the  Christian  religion  slowly  de- 
veloped out  of  its  original  monotheism  a  trinita- 
rian dogma  borrowed  from  Greek  philosophy,  and 
installed  its  founder  in  it  as  "very  God  of  very 
God ; "  what  no  Ethnic  religion  ever  did. 

Another  difference  that  arrests  attention  in  this 
comparative  study  is  that  the  Christian  trinity, 
after  reaching  its  full  development,  remains  sub- 
stantially fixed  in  its  trinitarian  form,  adhering  to 


274  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

the  three  persons  of  whom  it  was  originally  com- 
posed, and  also  to  the  methods  of  derivation  by 
which  these  were  related  to  each  other ;  while  the 
Ethnic  trinities  exhibit  a  much  more  facile  and 
fluxive  character,  —  easily  exchanging  one  trinity 
for  another,  doubling  or  triphng  them,  or  still 
further  pluralizing  them,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
Egyptian.  Yet  it  is  not  to  be  forgotten  that  the 
Christian  dogma  passed  through  a  considerable 
period  of  flux  and  change,  until  it  became  stereo- 
typed at  length  by  the  formation  of  creeds,  which 
were  henceforth  made  authoritative  and  unchange- 
able as  canons  of  orthodoxy.  The  Ethnic  trinities, 
on  the  other  hand,  had  a  freer  development,  and 
were  never  fixed  in  creeds.  The  dogmatic  spirit 
which  so  characterized  the  Nicene  age  is  thus 
largely  responsible  for  the  arrest  of  freedom  and 
fluidity  in  Christian  trinitarian  speculation.  To 
become  heretical  on  the  single  question  of  the 
form  of  the  trinity  as  set  forth  in  the  Nicene 
Creed  exposed  any  theological  leader  to  excom- 
munication and  even  exile  and  death.  This  ex- 
ternal cause,  rather  than  anything  radical  in  the 
nature  of  the  Christian  trinity,  explains  the  ap- 
parent inflexibility  of  the  Christian  dogma  as 
compared  with  the  Ethnic  trinities.  It  is  one  of 
the  most  significant  facts  of  history,  —  showing 
how  deep-seated  and  influential  is  the  religious 
sentiment  in  man's  nature,  —  that  no  human  pas- 
sion is  so  quickly  aroused  to  the  point  of  bitter 
and  relentless  persecution  as  the  passion  of  reli- 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  DIFFERENCES    275 

gion  when  it  becomes  wedded  to  some  particular 
form  of  dogmatic  belief.  The  annals  of  the 
Ethnic  religions  cannot  be  said  to  be  wholly  free 
from  these  perversions  of  the  religious  nature. 
But  this  can  be  said,  that  when  Ethnic  history  is 
compared  with  the  Christian  on  this  point,  the 
balance  is  overwhelmingly  in  favor  of  the  Ethnic 
religions.  Let  it  be  remembered  here  that  Mo- 
hammedanism does  not  count  among  them.  It  is 
half-brother  to  Christianity,  having  a  common  de- 
scent from  Judaism.  Indeed,  the  more  one  studies 
Ethnic  history,  the  more  one  is  surprised  and  im- 
pressed by  the  intellectual  and  religious  liberty 
that  was  universally  enjoyed,  except  on  rare  occa- 
sions of  special  excitement.  I  have  already  ad- 
verted to  the  remarkable  spri'it  of  toleration  shown 
in  the  Buddhist  faith  throughout  its  long  history, 
reminding  one  of  the  teachings  of  Christ  and  his 
gospel.  Alas !  that  Christianity  afterwards  should 
so  far  have  deteriorated  from  that  gospel  of  the 
founder,  and  should  have  made  so  poor  a  show 
when  compared  with  its  great  Eastern  rival.  It 
is  still  further  to  be  noted  that  the  Ethnic  trini- 
ties, as  well  as  the  Christian,  gradually  became 
crystallized  into  fixed  trinitarian  forms,  which 
have  remained  with  little  change  for  ages.  This 
was  especially  true  of  the  philosophical  Ethnic 
trinities,  with  which  the  Chi*istian  trinity  may 
more  properly  be  compared.  The  Hindoo  and 
Plotinian  trinities  in  their  full  pantheistic  form 
became   as    fixed   as   the   Christian   trinity,  and 


276  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

even  more  so,  for  the  Western  nations  that  were 
converted  to  Christianity  have  been  much  more 
progressive  than  the  Orientals,  and  the  great 
movements  that  have  agitated  Latin  Christendom 
have  given  to  Christian  theology  a  fluxive  charac- 
ter that  has  made  the  law  of  evolution  active  in 
all  its  history,  even  down  to  the  present  day. 

There  is  stiU  another  point  of  comparison 
where  a  noticeable  difference  is  discernible  between 
the  Ethnic  and  Christian  trinitarianism.  The 
Ethnic  trinities  have  as  a  rule  been  connected 
with  polytheistic  or  pantheistic  religious  ideas, 
or  a  mixture  of  both.  The  Vedic  trinities  had  a 
polytheistic  background.  The  later  Hindoo  tri- 
murti  was  compounded  of  a  strange  mixture  of 
pantheism  and  polytheism.  The  Christian  trinity, 
on  the  other  hand,  starting  from  monotheism,  was 
considerably  free  from  such  tendencies  in  either 
direction.  There  is  no  doubt  that  the  original 
Jewish  monotheistic  element  was  the  means  of  pre- 
serving Christianity  for  some  centuries  from  the 
polytheistic  and  pantheistic  influences  that  were  in 
the  air  around  it.  But  the  Christian  doctrine  of 
angels  and  devils,  which  came  directly  from  Juda- 
ism, contained  a  polytheistic  leaven  that  in  the 
course  of  time  leavened  the  whole  lump.  These 
beings,  good  and  evil,  were  of  superhuman  or  semi- 
divine  nature,  and  were  the  usual  messengers  from 
the  upper  world  to  the  earth,  sent  on  errands  of 
mercy  or  judgment.  There  is  no  doubt  that  the 
Jews  of  the  Captivity  received  their  ideas  con- 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS  —  DIFFERENCES    277 

cerning  spirits  dwelling  in  the  upper  air  from 
their  Zoroastrian  Persian  masters.  Such  in  gen- 
eral, indeed,  were  the  lower  gods  of  the  Ethnic 
polytheism.  The  Greek  pantheon  of  Olympus 
was  filled  with  such  beings,  —  gods  and  goddesses, 
—  who  were  all  obedient  to  Zeus,  the  "  Father  of 
gods  and  men."  The  Greek  doctrine  of  demons, 
or  gods  of  a  stiU  lower  and  lesser  sort,  was  of  later 
origin,  but  had  already  come  into  New  Platonic 
speculation  in  the  time  of  Plutarch.  Plato,  in  the 
Timaeus,  made  one  God  the  creator  and  father  of 
this  world,  employing  as  his  instruments  lower 
gods,  whom  he  first  created  and  then  bade  fulfill 
his  decrees  concerning  the  further  creation  of  the 
world  and  men.  This  view  comes  very  near  to 
the  Christian  doctrine  of  angels.  It  can  be  seen, 
then,  that  there  was  not  so  great  a  difference, 
after  all,  between  Ethnic  and  Christian  ideas 
as  to  the  divine  or  semi-divine  beings  who  in- 
habited the  celestial  regions.  It  was  mostly  a 
matter  of  names.  The  Ethnic  polytheism  that 
lay  behind  the  Ethnic  trinities  was  not  essentially 
different  from  the  Jewish  and  Christian  doctrine 
of  angels  and  devils  who  were  all  under  God's 
rule  and  willingly  or  unwillingly  did  his  bidding. 
We  know  how  prominent  became  this  feature  of 
Christian  theology  in  the  fourth  and  fifth  centu- 
ries, when  bad  as  well  as  good  spirits  from  the 
upper  world  were  believed  to  range  freely  over 
the  earth  and  enter  into  close  relations  with  hu- 
man kind,  with  power  to  injure  or  to  bless.     In 


278  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

fact,  the  monotheism  of  Christ  and  early  Chris- 
tianity had  abeady  largely  given  place  to  a  thor- 
oughly polytheistic  conception  of  the  relations  of 
the  upper  world  to  this  world.  Satan  practically 
divided  this  lower  sphere  with  God ;  and  the  mes- 
sengers and  servants  of  both  beings  were  busy  in 
the  discharge  of  their  various  functions.  Wherein 
such  views  differed  from  the  so-called  polytheism 
of  the  Ethnic  religions  it  is  not  easy  to  say. 
Here,  also,  is  the  explanation  of  the  rapid  growth 
of  saint  and  image  worship,  as  well  as  that  of  the 
Virgin  Mary.  The  line  between  the  divine, 
superhuman,  and  human  became  so  dim  and  in- 
distinct that  it  was  easily  crossed,  and  men  and 
women,  if  reputed  to  be  peculiarly  holy,  came  to 
be  treated  as  if  transfigured  into  superhuman  or 
even  divine  beings.  The  truth  is  that  during  the 
Middle  Ages  the  Christian  church  was  practically 
polytheistic,  —  a  fact  that  was  fitly  illustrated  when 
a  bishop  of  Rome  in  the  seventh  century  dedicated 
to  "  Mary  and  all  the  saints "  the  Pantheon,  a 
pagan  temple,  which,  as  its  name  shows,  had  been 
dedicated  to  all  the  gods  of  polytheism. 

I  am  sure  that  my  readers  are  by  this  time  pre- 
pared to  hear  me  confess  the  surprise  which  I 
have  experienced  in  the  progress  of  these  com- 
parative studies.  It  was  my  fuU  expectation  at 
the  outset  to  find  differences  between  the  Ethnic 
trinities  and  the  Christian  trinity  quite  as  radical 
as  the  resemblances ;  but  this  survey  has  revealed 
the  fact  that  the  resemblances  are  fundamental, 


INTERNAL  RELATIONS— DIFFERENCES    279 

while  the  differences  are  superficial,  and  on  closer 
scrutiny  are  seen  to  rest  on  external  and  fortui- 
tous rather  than  internal  grounds.  The  historical 
conclusion  to  which  one  is  forced  to  come  is  cer- 
tainly plain,  namely,  that  all  the  varied  forms  of 
monotheistic,  trinitarian,  polytheistic,  or  panthe- 
istic religion  in  the  world  have  one  common  root 
in  man's  religious  nature,  and  that  all  the  differ- 
ences which  have  been  developed  in  the  movements 
of  history  apparently  so  radical  and  complete  are 
traceable  to  differences  of  environment,  modifica- 
tions of  human  feeling  and  thought  brought  about 
by  natural  peculiarities  of  ra<?e,  isolation  of  tribes 
and  even  families  from  each  other  in  early  bar- 
barous times,  and  more  especially  by  the  different 
degrees  of  civilization  and  culture  to  which  the 
various  peoples  of  the  world  have  attained.  As 
Christians  we  do  the  highest  honor  to  Jesus  of 
Nazareth  when  we  let  history,  which  is  one  of 
God's  methods  of  providential  revelation,  teU  the 
whole  truth  about  him.  It  was  in  a  degree  par- 
donable to  men,  "  in  the  times  of  ignorance,"  to 
hold  a  blind  faith  and  even  to  faU  into  gross 
superstitions.  Like  age,  like  people,  like  reli- 
gion. What  could  be  expected  in  the  almost  total 
eclipse  of  intellectual  Hfe  in  the  so-called  Dark 
Ages  (seculum  obscurum)  of  mediaeval  Christen- 
dom but  a  religion  of  credulity  and  fear  and 
cruelty,  —  a  religion  which  I  venture  to  character- 
ize as  forming  the  most  terrible  religious  chapter 
in  all  history,  and  only  to  be  compared  with  the 


280  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

Shamanism  of  savage  tribes.  The  excuse  for  the 
execrable  deeds  of  that  unhappy  time  was  the 
profound  ignorance  of  the  people.  But  we  live  in 
a  different  world.  Slowly  but  surely  the  day  has 
dawned,  and  the  shadows  of  error  and  delusion 
have  disappeared.  Science  and  history  have 
opened  the  once  closed  book  of  God's  ways  in 
nature,  in  providence,  and  in  human  life.  Man 
has  found  his  rightful  place  in  God's  universe. 
Truth  revealed  gradually  and  "in  divers  ways," 
according  to  human  capacity  to  receive  it,  is  be- 
ginning to  show  its  real  eternal  nature  behind  all 
the  more  or  less  obscure  and  distorted  forms  of 
religious  faith ;  and  as  God's  law  of  evolution  de- 
velops man's  intellectual  and  moral  powers  more 
and  more  fuUy,  so  his  eternal  truth  will  corre- 
spondingly brighten  until  it  shall  become  the  Sun 
of  the  whole  moral  world  and  its  "  true  light " 
forever. 

Surely  the  excuse  of  the  "  times  of  ignorance  " 
cannot  be  ours.  With  increased  light  and  know- 
ledge comes  increased  responsibility.  The  long 
historical  past  over  which  our  survey  has  extended 
brings  in  its  train  a  solemn  message.  It  is  for 
Christians  of  to-day  to  read  it  aright. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  PEOVIDENTIAL  MISSION   OF   CECRISTIANITY 
AS   A   WORLD-BELIGION 

The  comparative  survey  now  concluded  of  the 
chief  religions  and  faiths  of  the  world,  especially 
as  to  the  nature  of  the  Divine  Being  and  his  re- 
lations with  mankind,  has  brought  us  to  a  point 
of  view  where  a  wide  and  comprehensive  outlook 
is  possible  of  the  present  providential  mission  of 
Christianity  as  a  coming  world-religion.  It  may 
be  asked  at  the  outset  whether  such  unity  of 
religious  beliefs  and  sentiments  and  principles  of 
conduct  is  possible  or  even  desirable.  But  why 
not  ?  All  things  in  this  age  of  ours  are  tending 
towards  unity  in  all  directions  as  never  before. 
The  central  forces  of  society  are  moving  from  iso- 
lation and  provincialism  towards  cosmopolitan 
forms  of  life.  The  cosmos  of  science  under  the 
law  of  natural  evolution  finds  itself  repeated  in 
a  cosmos  of  moral  order  and  unity.  The  unity  of 
nature  and  material  law  involves  the  essential 
unity  of  man  and  of  the  moral  kingdom.  Christ 
built  his  gospel  on  this  very  truth,  and  its  ideal 
was  that  "  all  may  be  one."  As  the  real  principle 
of  the  gospel  is  becoming  understood  and  prac- 


282  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

ticed,  the  unification  of  society  in  all  its  various 
forms  goes  on  apace.  It  is  beginning  to  move 
even  in  politics  as  weU  as  in  commerce  and  in  dif- 
ferent departments  of  international  relationship. 
Already  the  dream  of  a  far-off  millennium  when 
the  nations  shall  learn  war  no  more  seems  real- 
izable, as  one  notes  how  widely  the  principle  of 
unity  of  race  and  of  a  common  human  brother- 
hood is  triumphing  over  the  barbarous  ideas  of 
racial  separation  and  antagonism  and  hatred. 
Why  now  in  aU  this  movement  should  not  religion 
take  the  lead  ?  All  men  are  essentially  one  in 
religious  nature  and  in  moral  instincts,  hopes, 
fears,  and  aspirations.  The  foundations  of  the 
religious  life  are  laid  deep  in  the  common  religious 
instincts  and  yearnings  of  humanity.  Science, 
history,  and  philosophy  unite  in  affirming  the  unity 
of  the  Supreme  Power  that  moves  and  guides  the 
universe.  If  the  moral  consciousness  distinguishes 
a  moral  kingdom  with  its  own  moral  laws  from 
the  natural  cosmos  with  its  physical  laws,  it  also 
seeks  behind  both  realms  of  being  a  single  first 
cause,  — 

"  One  God,  one  law,  one  element, 
And  one  far-off  divine  event, 
To  which  the  whole  creation  moves ;  " 

and  if  this  be  true,  why  should  not  a  common  re- 
ligious faith  and  bond,  making  all  human  souls 
"  of  one  heart  and  of  one  mind,"  become  an  ac- 
complished fact,  and  not  be  allowed  to  remain  a 
millennial  ideal  ?     Such  a  consummation  is  not  a 


CHRISTIAKITY  AS  A  WORLD-RELIGION    283 

mere  vision  of  the  religious  fancy,  but  a  clear 
affirmation  of  the  Christian  consciousness  that 
grows  more  pronounced  and  emphatic  under  these 
last  revelations  of  God's  providence,  which  is  de- 
claring more  plainly  than  ever  before  the  "  good 
news  "  of  a  coming  world-wide  era  of  justice  and 
peace  and  unity. 

I  am  not  here  thinking  of  traditional  concep- 
tions of  external  unity  which  have  had  rule  so 
long,  but  which  historical  criticism  has  swept 
away  with  so  much  other  rubbish.  External 
church  organizations  indeed  have  their  uses ;  but 
when  outward  unity  is  made  a  fundamental  princi- 
ple of  the  Kingdom,  it  becomes  subversive  of  the 
very  unity  it  seeks  to  reach  and  preserve.  Every 
form  of  externality  is  limiting  and  divisive  in  its 
very  nature.  The  radical  trouble  with  Christendom 
to-day,  and  equally  with  all  the  religions  and  re- 
ligious organizations  of  the  world,  is  that  each 
church  or  established  religious  cult  claims  to  be 
the  true  kingdom  of  God  on  earth,  with  the  im- 
plication that  all  other  churches  so  called  lack, 
more  or  less  completely,  the  notes  or  marks  of  that 
kingdom.  The  same  is  true  of  all  credal  tests. 
They  are  barriers  to  unity.  History  shows  only 
too  clearly  that  they  have  always  been  the  great 
promoters  of  strife  and  discord.  As  we  look  back 
over  the  long  history  of  trinitarian  ideas,  as 
sunmied  up  in  the  Ethnic  and  Christian  trinities, 
what  is  the  impressive  lesson  taught,  if  not  this, 
that  no  true  religious  unity  can  ever  come  out  of 


284  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

religious  dogmas  and  the  assertion  of  them  as 
essentials  of  religious  harmony?  What  is  the 
ground  of  hope  to  the  historical  observer  to-day, 
as  he  surveys  the  religious  field,  if  not  just  this, 
that  our  new  age  with  its  new  scientific  and 
historical  light  is  breaking  down  the  barriers 
which  the  long  reign  of  dogmatic  faith  has  reared 
and  strengthened  into  fortresses  of  defensive  war- 
fare, and  is  thus  opening  the  way  for  the  spread 
everywhere  of  true  spiritual  freedom  and  charity 
and  love  and  peace  and  unity  ?  Yes,  history,  ma- 
ligned as  it  has  been,  is  already  proving  itself  to 
be,  as  its  principles  and  methods  are  allowed  to 
work  more  consistently  and  thoroughly,  the  provi- 
dential herald  of  God's  one  kingdom  of  hberty  and 
love  to  our  whole  human  race. 

But,  if  such  a  religious  unity  is  possible  and  to 
be  sought,  the  question  at  once  arises,  which  one 
of  the  great  historical  religions  that  have  hitherto 
shared  with  each  other  the  moral  dominion  of  the 
world  is  best  fitted  for  this  unifying  task.  Nor 
is  the  question  as  easy  to  answer  as  at  first  sight 
appears.  Christianity  is  one  of  the  younger  reli- 
gions of  the  earth.  In  numbers  it  is  surpassed  by 
other  religions.  It  is  not  the  only  religion  that 
has  the  missionary  proselyting  spirit  so  essen- 
tial to  any  religious  propaganda.  Over  against 
it  there  rise  still,  as  during  all  the  centuries  since 
Christ  first  proclaimed  his  new  gospel,  religions 
that  are  hoary  with  the  hallowed  traditions  of  age, 
and   have   become   intrenched   in  the   faith   and 


CHRISTIANITY  AS  A  WORLD-RELIGION    285 

affections  of  millions  of  devotees,  with  a  long  suc- 
cession of  prophets  and  sages,  and  sacred  writings 
that  are  as  venerable  and  dear  to  them  as  our  Old 
and  New  Testaments  are  to  us.  And  it  is  impor- 
tant here  to  note  that  all  the  efforts  of  Christen- 
dom for  these  nineteen  centuries,  by  sword  or  by 
gospel,  to  overthrow  these  intrenchments,  have 
been  utterly  vain.  I  do  not  forget  some  special 
Christian  missionary  movements  which  for  the 
time  seemed  f uU  of  hope ;  but  the  new  seed  never 
sank  into  the  soil  of  pagan  life,  —  whether  because 
the  ground  was  not  good  or  the  seed  not  rightly 
sown,  we  will  not  decide.  Still  less  would  I  speak 
depreciatingly  of  the  last  missionary  crusade  that 
has  given  our  own  age  so  conspicuous  a  place  in 
Christian  annals.  No  doubt  much  good  has  been 
done.  Foundations  have  been  laid.  The  Scrip- 
tures have  been  translated  into  many  non-Christian 
languages.  This  is  certainly  a  good  and  great 
work.  But  have  the  dense  masses  of  the  Hindoos, 
the  Chinese,  the  Buddhists,  the  Mohammedans, 
been  at  all  thoroughly  reached  and  moved  ?  Have 
the  religious  systems  whose  devotees  far  outnumber 
Christian  believers  yet  been  assailed  in  their  cen- 
tres of  influence  and  overthrown  ?  Certainly  not. 
Is  it  not  time,  then,  to  ask  how  such  ramparts  of 
dogmatic  and  traditional  defense  can  be  broken 
down  ?  History,  in  its  marvelous  evolution,  and 
history  alone,  gives  the  answer.  How  clearly  is 
divine  providence  working  to-day  to  solve  the  pro- 
blem that  has  seemed  so  difficult !     Never  before 


286  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

could  it  be  said,  as  it  can  be  to-day,  that  Christian- 
ity has  the  promise  of  the  future.  The  great 
political  powers  of  the  world  are  Christian.  The 
world's  commerce,  science,  culture,  hterature,  are 
in  Christian  hands.  What,  then,  we  are  ready  to 
ask,  is  the  vital  principle  in  the  Christian  religion 
that  has  given  it  this  position  of  intellectual  and 
moral  power  and  armed  it  for  the  work  of  the 
world's  evangelization?  History  again  is  our 
guide.  It  tells  us  in  language  not  to  be  mistaken, 
that,  not  by  ecclesiasticism  or  creeds  or  dogmatic 
barriers  and  defenses,  has  Christianity  grown  to 
its  present  stature,  but  by  that  leaven  of  Christ's 
original  gospel  which  has  continued  to  work  in 
saintly  lives,  even  in  darkest  periods  of  supersti- 
tion, until,  like  an  underground  river,  in  these  post- 
Reformation  times  it  has  regained  the  surface  of 
Christian  society  and  is  renewing  its  life  and 
strength  in  the  fresh  divine  revelations  of  our  age. 
What  the  essential  quality  of  that  gospel  leaven 
is  we  have  already  seen.  Christ's  kingdom  was 
of  the  spirit.  Its  ruling  force  was  love.  "  By  this 
shall  all  men  know  that  ye  are  my  disciples  if  ye 
have  love  one  to  another  ^^  (John  xiii.  35).  How 
hollow  and  sad  does  past  Christian  history  appear 
when  the  real  meaning  of  these  words  forces  itself 
on  our  minds !  What  a  false  religion  had  Chris- 
tianity become  when,  under  the  banner  of  Christ's 
cross,  it  came  to  be  a  source  of  division  and  strife 
and  bitterness !  And  all  because  it  had  missed 
the  true  meaning  of  Christ's  gospel,  and  made  its 


CHRISTIANITY  AS  A  WORLD-RELIGION    287 

essence  to  consist  in  constrained  unity  of  church 
authority  and  creed,  instead  of  the  freedom  of 
brotherly  love.  "  If  any  man  wiUeth  to  do  his 
will,  he  shall  know  of  the  teaching  whether  it  be 
of  God."  "  Ye  shall  know  the  truth,  and  the 
truth  shall  make  you  free."  ^  These  words  Christ 
himseK  explained  when  he  gave  his  "new  com- 
mandment." Here,  then,  is  the  true  trinity  of  the 
Christian  gospel :  Love^  truths  freedom  ;  for  love 
leads  to  truth,  and  truth  leads  to  freedom.  What 
now  follows  ?  This  :  that  such  dogmas  as  those 
of  the  trinity  or  the  metaphysical  deity  of  Christ 
and  kindred  ones  are  not  of  the  essence  of  the 
gospel;  for  they  are  matters  of  the  head,  and 
in  their  very  nature  create  division,  while  the 
gospel  of  Christ  is  an  experience  of  the  heart  and 
engenders  brotherhood  and  unity  and  charity. 
So  that  when  the  question  is  put  before  us :  how 
shall  Christianity  go  forth  to  evangelize  the  world? 
the  answer  rings  sharp  and  clear  from  the  lips  of 
history  itself:  not  by  any  effort  to  break  down 
and  destroy  the  Ethnic  religions  and  erect  the 
Christian  dogmas  on  their  ruins,  —  a  feat  which 
nineteen  centuries  have  proved  to  be  impossible,  — 
but  rather  to  reopen  the  too  long  closed  fountains 
of  the  original  gospel  proclaimed  by  Jesus  himself 

1  Let  me  here  say  once  for  all  that  I  quote  Christ's  sayings 
from  the  Fourth  Gospel  only  when  they  are  in  full  harmony  with 
the  Synoptic  gospels.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  in  the  passages 
here  used  the  unknown  writer  has  set  forth  in  language  of 
wonderful  power  and  beauty  the  central  elements  of  Christ's 
teaching. 


288  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

on  the  hiUs  of  Galilee  and  Judasa,  whose  essential 
notes  are  love  and  truth  and  freedom. 

But  let  us  not  misunderstand  the  true  import 
of  Christ's  words.  He  did  not  mean  that  it  is  of  no 
consequence  what  dogmas  a  man  may  hold,  or  that 
mere  love  and  obedience  will  solve  aU  religious 
problems  for  us ;  but  he  did  mean  that  the  way 
of  approach  to  such  problems  is  not  by  dogmatic 
authority,  but  by  each  man's  own  moral  conscious- 
ness working  on  all  questions  of  truth  through  the 
moral  exercises  of  love  and  liberty.  Obey  the 
new  moral  law  of  Christian  love,  and  that  love 
shall  make  you  free  in  the  truth.  Can  anything 
be  simpler  or  plainer?  And  yet  how  Christian 
tradition  has  distorted  and  falsified  it,  until  a  man 
named  with  the  name  of  Christ  could  put  his 
pagan  or  even  Christian  brother  to  a  cruel  death 
because  of  a  purely  dogmatic  or  speculative  dif- 
ference, and  think  he  was  "  doing  God  service." 
How  clear  aU  this  becomes  in  the  light  of  the 
comparative  history  of  religions !  Take,  for  exam- 
ple, the  dogma  of  the  trinity.  In  some  form  or 
other  this  dogma  is  one  of  the  most  ancient  and 
widespread  in  the  annals  of  human  belief  and 
thought.  A  close  analytical  comparison  reveals 
the  fact  that  aU  the  leading  trinities,  the  Christian 
included,  have  been  developed  from  certain  com- 
mon religious  intuitions  and  sentiments.  As  these 
trinities  have  grown  more  metaphysical  and  specu- 
lative, they  have  become  too  abstract  for  the  ordi- 
nary  comprehension  of  uneducated  people.     Yet 


CHRISTIANITY  AS  A  WORLD-RELIGION    289 

such  dogmas  have  been  taught  by  the  church  in 
its  creeds  as  if  they  were  of  the  essence  of  faith 
and  really  necessary  to  salvation.  Was  such  a 
yoke  ever  put  on  human  consciences  before  in  this 
whole  world's  history  ?  But  how  can  such  a  yoke 
be  put  on  the  devotees  of  non-Christian  religions  ? 
Notice  that,  if  Christianity  proposes  to  convert  the 
world  on  the  basis  of  its  dogmas,  dogma  must  be 
met  with  dogma.  The  question  must  be  as  to  the 
form  of  the  dogma  to  be  held.  How  vain  such  an 
appeal  must  be,  our  missionaries  have  been  learn- 
ing only  too  well.  On  this  very  question  of  the 
trinity,  —  the  special  subject  of  our  studies,  but 
also,  in  fact,  the  real  vital  centre  of  all  dogmatic 
theology,  —  the  educated  Hindoo  or  Mussulman 
will  unflinchingly  hold  his  ground  against  the 
Christian  missionary  who  is  seeking  to  convert 
him,  and  if  he  does  not  convince  his  opponent  that 
his  doctrine  of  God  is  purest  and  best,  he  will  cer- 
tainly convince  himself.  This  survey  has  shown 
that  no  keener  thinkers  have  ever  speculated  on 
trinitarian  lines  than  the  master  minds  of  Hindoo- 
ism  or  New  Platonism.  Compare  Origen,  Atha- 
nasius,  or  Augustine  with  the  unknown  builders 
of  the  Hindoo  trimurti^  or  with  Plato  and  Ploti- 
nus,  and  whither,  think  you,  must  the  palm  go? 
Is  it  not  enough  to  note  that  these  Christian  theo- 
logians freely  acknowledged  their  indebtedness  to 
their  Ethnic  masters  ? 

But  history  itself  shows  us  "  a  more  excellent 
way."     Paul  had  learned  enough  of  Christ's  gos- 


290  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

pel  to  declare  it,  in  the  most  inspired  chapter  of 
Apostolic  literature,  the  13th  of  1  Corinthians,  — 
that  famous  panegyric  of  love,  —  where  he  says : 
"  Though  I  have  aU  knowledge  it  is  nothing  with- 
out love."  Let  Christianity,  laying  aside  its  ex- 
ploded traditions  and  creeds  that  were  the  product 
of  ages  of  Christian  decline  and  darkness,  write  on 
its  banners  Christ's  parable  of  the  prodigal  son, 
and  Paul's  chapter  on  knowledge  versus  love,  with 
its  truly  ^trinitarian  close,  "But  now  abideth 
faith,  hope,  love,  these  three,  and  the  greatest  of 
these  is  love,^^  and  the  triumph  of  Christianity  as 
the  world's  religion  will  be  only  a  question  of  time. 


CHAPTER  V 

THE   UNEEADINESS   OF   CHKISTENDOM    FOR  THE 
FULFILLMENT   OF  ITS   MISSION 

But  I  must  not  forget,  in  my  idealistic  ardor, 
that  Christianity  is  not  yet  ready  to  take  up  its 
march  to  final  victory.  It  stiU  clings  to  its  swad- 
dling clothes  and  listens  with  unwilling  ears  to  the 
Zeitgeist  —  the  Carlylian  "  Sartor  Resartus  "  — • 
that  would  fain  reclothe  it  for  its  higher  destiny. 
In  Paul's  language,  it  still  "  speaks  as  a  child, 
feels  as  a  child,  thinks  as  a  child,"  and  cannot 
realize  that  the  time  has  come  when  it  should  "  be- 
come a  man  and  put  away  childish  things."  The 
passage  from  childhood  to  manhood  is  indeed  the 
most  critical  and  even  tragical  stage  in  the  moral 
history  of  an  individual  or  of  an  age.  It  is  like 
the  change  from  the  grub  to  the  butterfly,  —  the 
taking  on  of  new  faculties  —  a  veritable  birth  into 
a  higher  and  nobler  life.  Such  a  spiritual  regen- 
eration cannot  but  be  attended  with  sharp  pangs 
and  overwhelming  anxieties.  Jesus  himself  seems 
to  have  foreseen  what  bitter  experiences  would  be 
the  lot  of  his  disciples  in  the  future  progress  of 
his  kingdom,  and  forewarned  them  in  words  that 
grow  fuller  and  fuUer  of  prophetic  meaning  as  the 


292  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

ages  go  by :  "A  woman  when  she  is  in  travail 
hath  sorrow,  because  her  hour  is  come,  but  when 
she  is  delivered  of  the  child  she  remembereth  no 
more  the  anguish,  for  joy  that  a  man  is  bom  into 
the  world  "  (John  xvi.  21).  Christianity  is  pass- 
ing through  such  a  bitter  crisis  in  its  life  to-day. 
It  is  nothing  less  than  a  "  TraXtyycvco-ta."  Nothing 
so  radical  has  ever  before  happened  in  all  its  his- 
tory. From  the  day  (Oct.  1,  1859)  when  Charles 
Darwin  so  modestly  published,  in  his  immortal 
book  "  The  Origin  of  Species,"  the  results  of  his 
physical  researches,  and  showed  that  all  the  pro- 
cesses of  nature,  including  even  the  development 
of  species,  were  imder  a  single  law  of  natural  evo- 
lution, and  hence  required  no  special  miraculous 
creative  intervention  of  God,  the  whole  aspect  of 
nature  and  the  universe,  of  history  and  its  philo- 
sophical interpretation,  of  religion  and  God,  has 
completely  changed.  Of  course  the  movement  at 
first  was  slow  and  hesitating.  But  the  intimate 
relation  of  the  new  doctrine  of  evolution  to  previ- 
ous scientific  discoveries  was  quickly  seen,  and  the 
grand  unity  of  unalterable  law,  with  aU  that  it  in- 
volves in  aU  departments  of  knowledge,  has  already 
become  an  accepted  axiom  among  all  scientific, 
historical,  and  philosophical  scholars.  So  radical 
is  the  whole  change  of  view  that  it  can  only  be 
compared  to  a  new  birth  where  "  old  things  have 
passed  away  and  all  things  have  become  new." 
We  have  not  only  a  new  astronomy  and  geology, 
but  also  a  new  science  of  nature  and  of  life,  a  new 


UNREADINESS  OF  CHRISTENDOM         293 

biology  and  anthropology ;  and  out  of  all  this  new 
scientific  light  must  come  in  its  order  and  time  a 
new  philosophy  and  theology,  —  a  new  conception 
of  God  and  his  relation  to  the  universe  and  to 
man,  —  a  new  view  of  man  and  of  his  relations  to 
nature,  to  his  brother  man,  to  history,  and  to  God. 
It  is  the  fortune  or  misfortune  of  our  age  that  it 
is  in  the  very  midst  of  the  agonizing  throes  that 
must  attend  this  great  new  birth  of  the  opening 
century.  Fortunate  are  they  whose  eyes  are 
opened  seasonably  to  hail  the  coming  "  heir  of  all 
the  ages."  Does  the  human  mother  welcome  the 
natal  hour  when  "  a  man  is  born  into  the  world  "  ? 
Why,  then,  should  not  this  age  so  honored  and 
blessed  of  God  hail  the  new  scientific  and  histor- 
ical evangel  ? 

In  the  previous  chapter  I  called  attention  to  the 
providential  mission  of  Christianity  as  a  world-re- 
ligion ;  and  the  serious  question  remains,  how  shall 
Christendom  be  made  ready  for  the  work  given  it 
to  do  ?  Such  a  question  cannot  be  answered  until 
the  causes  of  its  present  unreadiness  are  thoroughly 
scrutinized  and  clearly  understood.  Let  us,  then, 
look  over  the  Christian  world  and  see  what  the 
real  situation  is.  First,  it  is  divided  into  two  great 
camps,  the  Catholic  and  the  Protestant,  which 
have  been  in  open  or  concealed  warfare  from  the 
outbreak  of  the  Protestant  Reformation  to  the 
present  day.  No  doubt  this  scientific  age  is  mak- 
ing deep  inroads  into  the  prejudices  and  misunder- 
standings which  have  hitherto  kept  these  two  great 


294  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

bodies  apart.  But  the  antagonistic  principles  upon 
wliich  both  rest  remain  firm  and  must  prevent  any- 
real  union  so  long  as  these  principles  are  adhered 
to.  What  a  spectacle  is  presented  to  non-Chris- 
tian peoples,  when  missionaries  come  to  them 
claiming  to  represent  one  common  religion  of 
Christ,  and  who  yet  treat  each  other  as  "aliens 
from  the  commonwealth  of  Israel,"  if  not  as  open 
enemies.  But  this  is  not  all.  Protestantism  itself 
is  split  up  into  sectarian  parties  and  churches, 
established  or  non-established,  large  portions  of 
which  do  not  regard  or  treat  the  rest  as  true 
Christian  organizations.  I  gladly  recognize  the 
rapid  strides  that  are  being  taken  among  us  to- 
ward a  more  Christian  unity  and  fraternity.  It 
is  the  most  promising  sign  of  the  times.  But  it 
must  not  be  overlooked  that  these  fraternizing 
movements  as  yet  extend  only  over  small  sections 
of  Protestant  Christendom,  and  are  sporadic  and 
inchoate ;  and  the  most  that  can  be  said  of  them  is 
that  they  give  evidence,  not  to  be  mistaken,  of  the 
partial  silent  penetration  of  God's  new  revelations 
into  the  minds  and  hearts  of  men.  Can  it  even 
now  be  said  that  the  spirit  of  denominational  and 
churchly  sectarianism  is  dying  out  to  any  great 
extent  in  the  great  organized  Protestant  churches  ? 
I  think  not.  It  must  be  remembered  that  Con- 
gregationalism is  but  a  comparatively  small  frac- 
tion of  the  whole  Christian  body.  It  is  among  us 
that  the  cardinal  Christian  principles  of  liberty 
and  fraternity  have  taken  deepest  root ;  but  how 


UNREADINESS  OF  CHRISTENDOM        295 

chary  are  our  churches  to  see  and  accept  all  that 
this  principle  involves!  As  history  shows,  no- 
where has  the  dogmatic  spirit  been  more  regnant 
than  at  the  very  headquarters  of  Congregational 
Protestantism,  and  wherever  that  spirit  lives 
Christian  freedom  in  the  truth  and  in  love  cannot 
be  allowed  its  full  birthright.  Such  is  the  condi- 
tion of  things  within  our  Christian  churches. 

But  what  is  to  be  said  of  that  larger  Christen- 
dom which  includes  the  masses  of  nominal  Chris- 
tian peoples  ?  It  is  just  here  that  the  historical 
outlook  is  most  discouraging.  Nothing  is  more 
certain  than  that  our  churches,  as  Christian  organ- 
izations, representing  traditional  Christianity,  are 
for  some  reason  slowly  losing  their  hold  upon  the 
outside  world.  I  am  not  now  raising  the  question 
whether  the  original  religion  of  Christ  or  the  reli- 
gious spirit  in  general  is  declining.  The  contrary, 
in  my  view,  is  true.  I  am  speaking  of  our  church 
organizations  that  have  held  the  position  of  Chris- 
tian leadership  and  authority  hitherto  and  have 
claimed  to  truly  represent  Christ  and  his  gospel. 
It  is  a  fact  which  cannot  be  gainsaid,  that  this  age 
is  witnessing  a  movement  away  from  organized 
Christianity  such  as  was  never  before  known  in 
its  history.  Explain  it  as  we  may,  the  fact  must 
be  accepted  as  one  of  the  most  significant  of  our 
times.  Figures  here  are  of  small  account.  The 
real  question  is,  what  are  the  leading  moral  and 
religious  forces  in  human  society  and  life,  and 
whither   are   they   tending?     I    am   aware   that 


296  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

dijfferent  answers  may  be  given,  according  to  the 
point  of  view,  and  it  must  remain  a  matter  to  a 
large  degree  of  individual  opinion.  But  it  is  my 
own  deliberate  judgment,  formed  from  a  long  and 
careful  survey,  with  some  exceptional  opportunities 
for  reaching  a  true  result,  that  traditional  Chris- 
tianity, with  its  old  creeds  and  dogmas  and  forms, 
is  passing  as  a  religious  force  out  of  the  great 
currents  of  thought  and  belief  among  the  intelli- 
gent masses  of  men  and  women  with  a  rapidity  that 
is  simply  alarming  to  every  open-eyed  Christian 
observer.  Let  it  be  understood  that  I  am  not 
attempting  to  decide  whether  the  organized  Chris- 
tian forces  or  the  unorganized  moral  forces  of  the 
outside  world  are  now  the  stronger,  but  simply  to 
discern  whither  the  drift  is  to-day.  Organized 
religion,  like  organized  law,  always  has  behind  it 
the  power  of  custom  and  legal  rescript  and  organ- 
ized instrumentalities  and  that  weight  of  unthink- 
ing attachment  to  what  is  old  which  is  always  to 
be  found  on  the  traditional  conservative  side.  But 
even  laws  that  remain  on  the  statute  book  eventu- 
ally become  a  dead  letter  when  the  ruling  forces 
of  society  cast  them  aside,  and  such  is  the  drift  of 
these  forces  to-day  as  respects  those  dogmas  and 
rites  of  Christianity  which  science  and  historical 
criticism  have  found  to  be  the  outgrowth  of  the 
ages  of  blind  faith  and  superstition.  Social  and 
moral  and  even  religious  leadership  is  silently  but 
surely  passing  from  our  organized  religious  bodies 
to  that  great  judgment-seat  of  the  educated  masses 


UNREADINESS  OF  CHRISTENDOM         297 

of  our  multitudinous  city  and  country  commu- 
nities. There  was  a  time,  and  not  so  long  since, 
when  the  churches  and  church  leaders  and  reli- 
gious newspapers  could  move  public  sentiment 
from  centre  to  circumference  on  any  religious 
question  that  pertained  to  ecclesiastical  or  doc- 
trinal orthodoxy.  How  far  this  is  from  true  to- 
day all  know.  Moral  leadership  among  us  no 
longer  depends  on  church  membership.  Would 
we  learn  whither  the  moral  forces  are  running  and 
whence  their  head-springs,  we  have  only  to  ask 
what  intelligent  people  are  reading  most,  and  what 
is  the  character  of  the  literature  that  is  passing 
through  the  largest  number  of  editions.  Are  our 
novels  and  daily  and  Sunday  secular  newspapers 
and  magazines  written  and  edited  as  a  rule  by 
members  of  our  churches,  and  in  the  interest  of 
the  dogmas  of  traditional  orthodoxy?  He  must 
be  an  ignorant  man  or  a  brave  man  who  will 
assert  it.  The  Zeitgeist  leavens  our  literature 
as  well  as  our  science  and  history,  and  through 
these  channels  is  flooding  Christendom  with  its 
new  religious  ideas.  Let  this  tide  sweep  on  a  few 
years  longer  and  can  there  be  any  doubt  what  the 
result  must  be?  One  of  two  things  will  surely 
happen.  Either  organized  Christianity  will  cease 
to  be  a  ruling  force,  or  it  will  have  been  regener- 
ated to  a  new  life  and  thus  able  to  regain  its  wan- 
ing moral  authority. 

Thus,  as  we  draw  towards  the  conclusion  of  our 
comparative  historical  survey,  we  find  the  Chris- 


298  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

tian  religion  exposed  to  dangers  both  without  and 
within.  Without,  the  ancient  Ethnic  religions 
remain  fixed  in  their  ancestral  boundaries,  with 
dogma  ranged  against  dogma,  and  superstition 
against  superstition,  and  ready  still  to  meet  Chris- 
tianity on  its  own  ground  of  dogmatic  argument ; 
within,  schism,  sectarian  rivalry,  and  disagreement 
—  the  fruits  of  national  and  civil  religious  wars 
whose  wounds  are  not  yet  healed  —  stiU  divide  it 
into  numerous  opposing  camps  fighting  imder  dif- 
ferent banners  ;  and  last,  but  not  least,  the  trans- 
formed spirit  of  a  new  age  has  risen  up  against  its 
traditional  dogmas  and  pretensions  and  threatens 
to  cast  it  wholly  aside. 

But  our  survey  is  not  yet  complete.  It  remains 
for  us  to  take  a  closer  view  of  the  organized 
church,  and  see  how  far  it  is  prepared  to  meet 
and  solve  the  problems  that  are  forcing  themselves 
upon  its  attention  and  are  menacing  its  very  life. 
Such  a  view  reveals  two  great  and  imminent 
perils  growing  out  of  its  intellectual  and  moral 
condition.  These  perils  will  form  the  subject  of 
the  two  following  chapters. 


CHAPTER  VI 

TWO   PEEIL8   OF   ORGANIZED   CHRISTIANITY 

I.  Igmyrance 

It  is  one  of  the  most  remarkable  facts  of  our 
times  tliat  large  numbers  of  our  intelligent  minis- 
ters and  cburch  members  who  are  quite  alive  to 
the  significance  of  the  new  revelations  of  God  and 
his  truth  that  have  recently  been  made  through 
scientific  and  historical  channels,  and  are  ready  to 
accept  the  law  of  natural  and  historical  evolution 
up  to  a  certain  point,  yet  shut  their  eyes  persist- 
ently against  the  results  of  this  law  when  it  is 
brought,  as  it  must  be,  into  the  sphere  of  religion 
and  its  dogmatic  traditions.  Such  persons  will 
not  allow  "the  faith  once  delivered,"  as  they 
fondly  call  these  traditions,  to  be  disturbed.  Not 
a  few  churches  to-day  are  declaring  that  scientific 
and  historical  criticism  is  a  traitor  in  the  Christian 
camp.  Such  a  charge  is  indeed  strange  as  com- 
ing from  educated  men,  and  can  be  explained  only 
as  illustrating  the  tremendous  power  of  a  dog- 
matic presupposition.  It  may  be  hoped  that,  with 
the  inevitable  decay  of  the  dogmatic  spirit,  this 
class  of  opponents  of  religious  progress  will  soon 
disappear.     But  a   more   serious  question   arises 


300  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

when  the  position  of  the  less  educated  members 
of  the  churches  throughout  Christendom,  Catholic 
and  Protestant,  is  considered.  Here  it  is  not  a 
case  of  a  dogmatic  presupposition  which  shuts  the 
eyes,  but  that  of  a  real  and  profound  ignorance  as 
to  the  character  of  the  changes  which  science  and 
history  are  bringing  about  in  all  matters  of  human 
life,  and  especially  as  to  the  effect  of  these  changes 
on  religious  dogmas.  This  class  stiU  forms  the 
majority  of  church  members  in  all  Christian  or- 
ganizations. It  does  not  require  a  very  large 
acquaintance  with  the  history  of  the  church  to 
enable  one  to  realize  what  a  dead  weight  in  the 
path  of  all  religious  or  theological  movement  such 
a  mass  of  ignorance  is.  The  fact  that  this  class  is 
so  sincere  in  its  beliefs  only  makes  the  danger  the 
greater.  Religious  conscientiousness  when  stimu- 
lated by  bigotry  is  capable  of  the  highest  unreason. 
Nothing  is  so  stubborn  or  so  fanatical  as  a  wrongly 
instructed  conscience,  as  Paul  showed  in  his  own 
case  by  his  own  confession.  Only  skillful  leader- 
ship is  required  to  fix  a  large  portion  of  Christen- 
dom in  an  attitude  of  hostile  opposition  to  the 
strongest  intellectual  and  moral  currents  of  our 
times ;  and  such  leadership  is  not  wanting.  This 
is  true  not  only  of  the  Catholic  authorities,  but  also 
of  a  considerable  portion  of  the  Protestant  church 
officials.  Even  in  our  free  and  independent  Congre- 
gational churches  there  are  those  who  would  raise 
the  old  cry  of  heresy  in  order  to  excite  an  ignorant 
prejudice  if  it  could  be  of  any  avail.     So  that  it 


PERILS  OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY     301 

becomes  a  serious  question  whether  the  great  body 
of  church  members  throughout  Christendom  is  not 
on  the  point  of  breaking  with  the  dominant  reli- 
gious spirit  of  the  age,  and  of  thus  widening  the 
chasm  between  the  organized  church  and  the  out- 
side world.  Already  it  can  be  seen  that  large 
numbers  of  intelligent  representative  men  and 
women  are  looking  elsewhere  than  to. the  church 
for  religious  leadership  and  authority ;  and  this  is 
the  reason  undoubtedly  why  so  many  of  this  class 
hold  themselves  aloof  from  church  membership. 
No  wonder  that  churchmen  are  marking  the  drift 
away  from  our  church  organizations,  and  are  devis- 
ing ways  and  means  to  arrest  it.  But  "  forward 
movements,"  —  to  use  the  phrase  now  in  vogue, — 
along  old  lines  of  Christian  activity,  will  be  found 
largely  futile.  Spasmodic  revivalistic  meetings 
here  and  there  will  heal  the  hurt  slightly.  The 
disease  is  deeper  than  the  old  methods  of  diagnosis 
reach.  To  be  effectual  the  remedy  must  go  as 
deeply  as  the  disease  and  work  healing  from  the 
roots.  The  real  ailment  is  not  mere  worldliness 
and  unspirituality,  as  is  so  generally  assumed. 
These  religious  defects  are  of  course  always  inci- 
dental to  man's  life  on  earth ;  but  in  the  present 
state  of  our  churches  they  are  only  symptomatic 
of  a  deeper  trouble.  The  radical  ailment  is  to  be 
found  in  the  fact  that  our  churches  are  still 
wedded  to  forms  of  religious  truth  and  to  churchly 
theories  and  methods  that  are  out  of  joint  with 
our  times.     For  such  a  disease  there  is  but  one 


302  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

efficacious  remedy.  As  so  often  in  political  emer- 
gencies, so  now  in  religion,  what  is  imperatively 
demanded  is  a  campaign  of  education^ — a  forward 
movement  all  along  the  line  in  harmony  with  the 
new  revelations  of  God's  truth.  I  am  not  insensi- 
ble to  the  signs  of  movement  in  the  church  itself. 
I  know  how  widespread  is  the  spirit  of  inquiry 
within  the  church  as  well  as  without,  and  how 
greatly  the  interest  in  Bible  study  has  been  quick- 
ened in  these  latter  years.  But  everything  depends 
on  the  character  of  such  study.  Take  the  case  of 
the  young  in  our  Sunday-schools  and  Bible  classes. 
Better  no  study  at  all  than  a  study  along  the  old 
lines  of  theological  instruction.  Nothing  can  be 
worse  for  a  child  to-day  than  to  have  its  mind  filled 
with  religious  ideas  and  impressions  that  will  be 
found  in  later  years  to  rest  on  unhistorical  tradi- 
tion. Yet  the  teachers  in  our  Sunday-schools  are 
too  often  young  persons  who  are  utterly  unfitted 
to  explain  the  Scriptures,  being  ignorant  of  the 
simplest  principles  of  Biblical  criticism.  If  there 
was  ever  a  time  when  our  best  educated  Christians 
should  be  put  in  charge  of  the  religious  instruction 
of  the  young  it  is  now.  In  every  community  a 
class  should  be  formed  of  aU  candidates  for  the 
post  of  a  religious  teacher,  which  should  be  placed 
under  the  direct  supervision  of  some  person  whose 
fitness  will  win  the  respect  and  confidence  of  the 
community  at  large. 

Moreover,  it  is  a  time  when  timidity  of  reli- 
gious leadership  should  cease,  and  give  place  to 


PERILS  OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY      303 

courageous  action.  Too  long  has  the  excuse  been 
that  the  people  are  not  prepared  for  such  religious 
changes.  Such  an  excuse  implies  lack  of  faith  in 
God  and  his  providence,  as  weU  as  failure  to  read 
the  signs  of  the  times.  Knowledge  is  running  to 
and  fro,  and  is  increased  as  never  before.  The 
new  science  and  history  permeates  not  only  our 
higher  institutions  of  learning  and  our  literature, 
but  even  the  very  air  we  breathe,  and  for  the 
church  to  ignore  such  a  fact  is  to  be  false  to  its 
highest  and  plainest  moral  duty.  To  faU  back  in 
such  a  crisis  on  God's  care  of  his  church  and  quote 
Christ's  words,  "  The  gates  of  heU  shall  not  pre- 
vail against  it,"  is  worse  than  in  vain.  What 
Christ  meant  by  his  "church"  he  himself  ex- 
plained :  "  Where  two  or  three  are  met  together 
in  my  name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them." 
To  make  this  the  charter  and  refuge  of  any  his- 
torical organization  is  to  miss  and  falsify  the  deep 
spiritual  significance  of  Christ's  words.  Yet  it  is 
not  surprising  that  such  a  false  interpretation  was 
soon  accepted.  The  world  was  not  ripe  for  a 
spiritual  church  when  Christ  entered  it.  As  early 
as  the  second  century  Christian  leaders  began  to 
misunderstand  the  teachings  of  their  master.  Ire- 
nseus,  stanch  churchman  that  he  was,  opposing 
heretics  and  schismatics,  asserted  that  "where 
the  church  is,  there  is  the  spirit  of  God,"  from 
which  he  drew  the  inference  that  all  who  were 
separate  from  the  church,  as  an  external  organiza- 
tion, were  cut  off  from  the  influences  of  the  Holy 


304  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

Ghost.  Only  one  step  more  needed  to  be  taken 
to  complete  this  wholly  unchristian  view,  namely, 
that  the  church  with  its  bishops  in  historical  suc- 
cession from  the  Apostles,  and  with  the  sacra- 
ments administered  by  them,  is  the  true  kingdom 
of  God  on  earth,  outside  of  which  there  is  no  con- 
fident ground  of  salvation ;  and  this  step  was  taken 
a  little  later  by  Cyprian,  the  first  highchurchman 
clearly  known  to  history.  Of  course  such  a  high- 
church  doctrine  has  little  footing  among  us  who 
are  descendants  of  the  Pilgrim  Puritans  of  New 
England,  but  I  am  not  so  sure  that  the  idea  is 
not  deeply  rooted  in  the  minds  of  many  good 
Congregational  people  that  our  church  organiza- 
tions as  organizations  are  somehow  of  truly  di- 
vine origin  and  authority  (^jure  divine'),  and  are 
the  only  representatives  and  repositories  of  God's 
truth  and  grace.  Such  persons  ought  to  read 
carefully  the  seven  epistles  to  the  seven  churches 
of  Asia,  and  remember  that  the  warnings  there 
uttered  were  afterwards  historically  fulfilled. 
Those  "  seven  candlesticks  "  were  "  moved  out  of 
their  places,"  and  "  the  seven  churches  which  are 
in  Asia "  have  been  extinct  so  long  that  history 
fails  to  preserve  any  definite  account  of  their  dis- 
solution. Nor  was  this  case  an  isolated  one.  The 
same  thing  has  happened  again  and  again  in 
Christian  annals.  Let  me  give  a  single  further 
illustration.  In  the  second,  third,  and  fourth 
centuries  the  most  flourishing  churches  in  Chris- 
tendom were  those  in  North  Africa.     For  a  time, 


PERILS  OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY      305 

in  the  persons  of  Cyprian  and  Augustine,  this 
portion  of  the  Christian  world  became  the  very- 
centre  of  ecclesiastical  and  theological  influence. 
But  what  is  the  case  to-day  ?  Not  only  are  all 
these  churches  extinct,  but  Christianity  itself  has 
departed,  leaving  no  trace  behind  but  a  few  dismal 
ruins,  and  Mohammedanism  in  its  most  bigoted 
form  fills  the  land.  Surely  history  proves  one 
thing,  if  nothing  else,  that  no  institution,  however 
sacred  its  claim,  can  live  simply  on  its  past.  Least 
of  all  can  such  an  anachronism  have  any  chance 
of  life  to-day.  The  church,  hke  all  things  else, 
cannot  hope  to  survive  in  its  present  form  if  it 
loses  the  respect  and  confidence  of  men ;  and  this 
is  one  of  the  dangers  that  beset  our  Christian 
organizations  to-day.  How  can  intelligent  men 
and  women  whose  ears  are  filled  with  the  new 
voices  of  God's  providence  respect  an  organization 
that  claims  to  speak  in  God's  name  and  yet  re- 
mains deaf  to  such  divine  voices  and  even  strives 
to  stifle  them  ?     It  is  simply  impossible. 

But  ignorance  is  not  the  only  peril  that 
threatens  the  organized  church ;  there  is  another 
peril,  and  perhaps  it  is  the  greater. 


CHAPTER  VII 

TWO   PERILS    or   ORGANIZED    CHRISTIANITY 

II.  Insincerity 

If  it  be  true  that  "  ignorance  is  the  mother  of 
superstition,"  it  is  equally  true  that  insincerity 
is  the  mother  of  hypocrisy.  When  Christ  called 
the  orthodox  leaders  of  his  day  "  hypocrites,"  he 
probed  them  to  the  core,  and  his  bold  words  cost 
him  his  life.  It  is  the  cardinal  peculiarity  of  this 
moral  vice  that  it  juggles  with  itself  and  wears 
with  a  kind  of  honesty  the  face  of  the  loftiest  vir- 
tue ;  the  deceiver  is  also  self -deceived.  Its  root 
lies  hidden  in  the  darkest  corner  of  the  soul, 
covered  with  all  the  multitudinous  motives  that 
govern  moral  action.  The  notable  thing  about  it 
is  that  its  favorite  haunt  has  always  been  in  that 
region  of  human  nature  where  the  religious  sen- 
timents and  emotions,  with  all  their  superstitious 
accompaniments,  are  centred  and  hold  sway. 
History  shows  that  in  no  sphere  of  human  society 
has  hypocrisy  played  so  large  a  part  or  entailed 
on  the  world  such  calamitous  results  as  in  that  of 
religion.  It  is  one  of  the  noblest  features  of 
Christ's  gospel  that  its  keynote  is  complete  sin- 
cerity in  thought,  word,  and  deed.    Paul,  too,  seems 


PERILS  OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY     307 

to  have  caught  the  real  spirit  of  his  master.  But 
Christianity  quite  early  became  infected  with 
ideas  inherited  from  pre-Christian  ethics.  The 
history  of  Christian  casuistry  in  the  matter  of 
truthfulness  and  the  lawfulness  of  deception  in  cer- 
tain exceptional  cases  is  deeply  interesting  and  in- 
structive. A  book  might  be  written  on  it.  Only 
a  summary,  however,  can  here  be  given,  simply 
that  we  may  understand  the  real  character  of  the 
moral  danger  that  now  threatens  Christendom. 

The  ethical  system  of  Plato  and  Aristotle,  from 
which  the  Graeco-Roman  Christianity  so  largely 
drew  its  ethical  ideas,  was  in  the  main  a  noble 
one  and  based  on  just  moral  principles.  Plato, 
in  his  Republic,  which  deals  with  justice,  strikes 
at  once  the  keynote  of  his  whole  ethical  philo- 
sophy, when  he  quotes  a  passage  from  ^schylus, 
in  which  the  poet  describes  the  good  man  as  not 
wishing  merely  to  appear  to  be  good  to  others,  but 
to  be  good  in  reality :  Ov  yap  SoKecv  apto-ros  d\X* 
€tvat  OeXci.  "  The  true  lie,"  Plato  says,  "  is  hated  of 
gods  and  men,"  and  he  adds  in  explanation,  "  no 
one  will  admit  falsehood  into  that  which  is  the 
truest  and  highest  part  of  himself  or  about  the 
truest  and  highest  matters."  Plato  further  holds 
that  God  "  can  never  lie  or  deceive  in  any  way," 
since  such  deception  is  contrary  to  his  whole 
nature.  It  was  on  this  ground  that  Plato  opposed 
the  use  of  Homer  and  other  poets  in  education, 
because  in  their  poems  the  gods  were  described  as 
"  deceiving  mankind."     But  Plato  recognized  cer- 


308  THE  ETHNIC   TRINITIES 

tain  cases  where  a  "  lie  in  words "  is  necessary ; 
for  example,  in  dealing  with  sick  or  insane  persons. 
Hence  he  was  led  to  make  a  curious  distinction 
between  "  the  true  lie  "  and  the  "  lie  in  words," 
which  latter  he  defines  as  "  only  a  kind  of  imita- 
tion and  shadowy  image  of  a  previous  affection 
of  the  soul,  not  a  pure  unadulterated  falsehood." 
Such  a  verbal  lie,  he  holds,  may  "  in  certain  cases 
be  useful  and  not  hateful."  Yet  realizing,  as 
Plato  plainly  did,  how  easily  this  exception  to  the 
rule  might  be  taken  advantage  of  in  the  inter- 
ests of  injustice,  he  added  the  following  express 
limitation :  "  Truth  should  be  highly  valued ;  if, 
as  we  were  saying,  a  lie  is  useless  to  the  gods, 
and  useful  only  as  a  medicine  to  men,  then  the 
use  of  such  medicines  should  be  restricted  to  phy- 
sicians ;  private  individuals  have  no  business  with 
them."  Here  follows  a  sentence  which  has  be- 
come famous  in  Christian  ethics,  where  Plato  de- 
clares that  "  the  rulers  of  the  state  may  be  allowed 
to  lie  for  the  public  good,"  while  aU  private  per- 
sons should  be  forbidden  this  privilege  and  pun- 
ished for  practicing  it.  It  is  thus  clear  that 
Plato's  ethics  were  essentially  sound ;  and  his 
famous  exception  must  be  allowed  in  some  cases 
to  hold  good.  No  man  of  common  sense  would 
hesitate  to  deceive  an  insane  man  or  a  robber  or 
a  murderer,  if  by  such  deception  he  could  prevent 
an  act  of  frenzy  or  a  crime.  This  was  just  what 
Plato  meant  by  his  "  royal  lie."  But  what  was 
plainly  an  exceptional  and  superficial  element  in 


PERILS  OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY     309 

Plato's  ethics  of  truthfulness  grew  more  and  more 
to  be  an  important  element  of  Christian  morals, 
and  in  the  form  of  the  "  officiosum  mendacium  " 
has  had  a  remarkable  history.  Plato's  theory  of 
the  "  royal  lie  "  seems  to  have  entered  Christian 
ethics  'largely  through  Philo,  who  uses  it  in  ex- 
plaining certain  apparently  contradictory  passages 
in  the  Old  Testament  in  relation  to  the  character 
of  God.  Here,  however,  Philo  goes  beyond  Plato, 
making  God  the  chief  agent  in  the  use  of  falsehood 
for  the  good  of  men,  whereas  Plato  denied  that 
God  could  have  anything  to  do  with  deception  in 
any  way  whatever,  and  restricted  its  use  to  human 
rulers  for  the  good  of  the  state.  This  Philonic 
enlargement  of  Plato's  exception  deeply  affected 
Christian  thought.  Its  leaven  clearly  appears  in 
the  writings  of  Origen,  who  as  a  theologian  and 
exegete  was  the  most  influential  Father  of  the  early 
church.  The  influence  of  Aristotle  should  also  be 
noted.  In  his  "  Nicomachean  Ethics  "  Aristotle 
treats  of  truthfulness  (iv.  9),  illustrating  his  gen- 
eral doctrine  of  virtue  as  a  mean  between  extremes, 
and  making  truthfulness  to  be  the  mean  between 
exaggeration  or  overstatement  and  dissimulation 
or  concealment  of  the  real  truth.  With  Plato, 
Aristotle  makes  truthfuhiess  essentially  an  inward 
moral  state  rather  than  an  outward  act,  though  he 
does  not  make  SP  much  of  Plato's  discrimination 
between  the  "  true  lie  "  and  the  "  verbal  lie,"  and 
regards  truthfulness  in  words  as  the  natural  ac- 
companiment  of  truthfulness   of   soul.     The  vir- 


310  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

tuous  man,  he  says,  "  is  true  in  life  and  word, 
simply  because  he  is  in  a  certain  moral  state." 
Thus  Aristotle  corrected  in  a  degree  the  vacil- 
lating tendency  of  Plato;  and  it  is  due  to  the 
reputation  which  he  enjoyed  in  the  Middle  Ages 
that  the  great  Catholic  schoolmen,  such  as  Peter 
Lombard  and  Thomas  Aquinas,  were  saved  from 
defending  the  "  officiosum  mendacium "  in  its 
most  glaring  forms.  Yet  their  treatment  of  the 
whole  subject  is  implicit  proof  of  the  hold  which  a 
perverted  Christian  tradition  continued  to  have 
even  on  the  minds  of  the  most  enlightened  leaders 
of  the  Catholic  church. 

There  was  another  source  of  Christian  ethics 
concerning  truthfulness  which  cannot  be  over- 
looked. The  Old  Testament  was  the  first  Chris- 
tian Bible,  and  the  accounts  of  the  deceptions  prac- 
ticed by  Abraham,  Jacob,  Rahab,  David,  and  other 
Hebrew  saints  had  no  little  influence  in  neutraliz- 
ing the  natural  effect  of  the  teaching  of  Christ  and 
Paul.  The  use  made  of  such  Old  Testament  ex- 
amples by  Thomas  Aquinas  and  others  in  defense 
of  the  "  officiosum  mendacium  "  is  highly  sugges- 
tive, and  helps  us  to  understand  the  ease  with 
which  exceptions  to  the  law  of  truthfulness  gained 
entrance  into  Christian  morals.  I  can  give  only  a 
few  illustrations  of  the  process  by  which  such  vio- 
lations came  to  be  regarded  as  lawful.  It  began 
very  early  in  the  efforts  to  defend  Christianity 
against  pagans  and  heretics.  It  was  assumed  that 
the  end  sanctified  the  means  ;  that  truth  might  be 


PERILS  OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY     311 

violated  in  defense  of  "  the  truth."  A  new  prin- 
ciple of  interpretation  was  applied  to  Scripture 
which  enabled  any  dogma  to  be  foisted  into  it, 
namely,  that  of  a  double  or  triple  sense  of  a  pas- 
sage. Augustine  went  so  far  as  to  declare  that  a 
dozen  different  interpretations  might  be  given  to 
the  opening  chapters  of  Genesis,  and  all  of  them 
be  true.  Behind  this  vicious  exegesis  is  to  be  seen 
Philo's  theory  that  God  may  indulge  in  a  sort  of 
deception  in  his  revelations  of  himself  to  man.  As 
the  church  began  to  proceed  with  increasing  se- 
verity against  the  various  heretical  schools  that 
were  springing  up,  it  became  customary  for  such 
persecuted  sects  to  practice  concealment  of  their 
peculiar  opinions,  on  the  ground  that  the  end  sanc- 
tified the  means,  and  that  the  truth  is  not  for  all 
men.  This  led  the  orthodox  party  to  descend  to 
a  like  dissimulation,  in  order  to  discover  the  real 
doctrines  of  their  opponents.  A  bishop  of  Antioch 
went  so  far  as  to  pretend  to  be  in  full  agreement 
with  a  leader  of  one  of  these  sects,  and  in  this 
way  managed  to  extort  a  confession  from  him 
which  was  then  used  against  him  and  his  whole 
party.  As  the  spirit  of  dogmatism  and  persecu- 
tion increased,  and  controversies  arose  within  the 
church  itself,  the  same  practice  of  evasion  and  con- 
cealment entered  the  ranks  of  orthodoxy.  So  far 
was  this  carried  that  in  the  General  Council  of 
449,  known  as  the  "  Robber  Synod,"  bishops  were 
forced  to  sign  blank  papers  which  were  afterwards 
filled  out  by  the  party  in  the  majority  with  such  a 


312  THE  ETHNIC   TRINITIES 

creed  as  they  desired.  These  men  confessed  their 
mendacious  conduct  afterwards  at  the  Council  of 
Chalcedon,  and  excused  it  on  the  ground  of  com- 
pulsion and  fear.  A  vivid  illustration  of  the  sad 
demoralization  that  befeU  Christian  morality  in 
the  matter  of  truthfulness  is  found  in  the  way  in 
which  the  Origenistic  party  in  the  sixth  century 
parried  an  attack  of  their  enemies.  When  a  synod 
had  condemned  the  doctrines  of  the  great  Origen, 
the  party  leaders,  to  use  the  language  of  Neander, 
"  sacrificed  the  truth,  to  save  their  own  interests 
and  that  of  their  party.  They  likewise  subscribed 
the  decrees  of  the  synod  and  consequently  nothing 
could  be  done  to  them."  It  is  no  wonder  that  the 
noble  moral  feelings  of  Augustine  rebelled  against 
these  lax  principles  which  were  passing  from  the 
East  to  the  West.  When  it  was  proposed  that 
the  church  should  employ  the  dissimulation  prac- 
ticed by  the  Priscillianists  against  them,  Augustine 
opposed  it  earnestly  and  wrote  his  work,  "  Contra 
Mendacium^^^  in  which  he  was  led  to  take  an  ex- 
treme position,  holding  that  under  no  circumstances, 
even  to  save  honor  or  life,  was  a  falsehood  in 
thought,  word,  or  deed  morally  allowable.  Augus- 
tine had  previously  been  induced  to  go  to  this 
extreme  by  a  controversy  with  Jerome,  who  de- 
fended the  dissimulation  of  Peter  at  Antioch. 
But,  powerful  as  Augustine  was,  he  could  not 
overcome  the  current  that  was  flowing  more  and 
more  strongly  toward  the  allowance  of  prevarica- 
tion in  all  cases  where  the  interests  of  Christian 


PERILS  OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY     313 

truth  were  supposed  to  be  at  stake.  It  is  impos- 
sible here  to  illustrate  the  infamous  excesses  to 
which  the  doctrine  of  legitimate  falsehood  was  car- 
ried. The  whole  history  of  mediaeval  Christianity 
is  filled  with  the  most  shocking  examples.  Per- 
haps the  most  famous  illustration  —  famous  in 
view  of  its  superabounding  infamy  —  was  the 
treatment  of  John  Huss,  whose  safe-conduct,  given 
to  him  by  the  Emperor  Sigismund,  was  canceled 
by  the  General  Council  at  Constance  on  the  ex- 
press ground  that  no  faith  was  to  be  kept  with 
heretics,  it  being  assumed  that  if  a  man  was  con- 
victed of  a  certain  crime  the  church  was  absolved 
from  the  guilt  of  committing  a  worse  one.  Surely 
the  lowest  depths  of  moral  baseness  were  reached 
in  this  act  of  the  largest  council  ever  assembled 
in  Christendom ;  and  it  is  no  wonder  that  the 
blush  which  mantled  the  face  of  Sigismund,  when 
Huss  fixed  his  eye  upon  him  before  the  whole 
council  and  reminded  him  of  the  safe-conduct 
he  had  given  without  any  conditions,  is  historic. 
What  Christian  man  does  not  himself  blush  as  he 
reads  the  pitiful  story  ? 

But  why,  it  may  be  asked,  have  I  stopped  to 
indulge  in  this  historical  digression  ?  I  answer, 
because  it  lies  behind  and  explains,  as  nothing 
else  can,  the  deep  current  of  insincerity  in  matters 
of  religion  which  is  stiU  eating  as  a  canker  into 
the  heart  of  Christendom.  We  have  heard  much 
of  Jesuit  casuistry,  as  if  it  were  peculiar  to  the 
Catholic  church.     It  is  true  that  the  "  officiosum 


314  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

mendacium  "  with  its  fatal  leaven  remained  in  the 
old  historic  church  after  the  Protestant  revolt, 
and  that  the  Jesuit  order  has  undoubtedly  made 
great  use  of  it.  But  it  is  a  historical  blunder  to 
assume  that  the  Lutheran  Reformation  involved 
any  radical  change  in  traditional  theology  or  ethics. 
Not  only  were  the  great  creeds  and  dogmas  of  the 
old  church  retained,  but  they  were  even  stiffened 
and  made  more  than  ever  the  essentials  of  Chris- 
tian faith ;  and  deeply  imbedded  in  these  dogmas 
and  in  the  methods  of  defense  of  them  was  the 
"  officiosum  mendacium  "  with  its  allowance  of  dis- 
simulation and  falsehood  "that  good  may  come." 
The  historical  fact  is  that  the  Protestant  revolt  did 
not  quite  break  the  chains  of  mental  and  moral  slav- 
ery which  the  church  had  been  forging  for  centu- 
ries and  binding  more  completely  on  the  necks  of 
men.  Even  our  own  Puritan  forefathers,  who  had 
come  as  pilgrims  to  these  shores  that  they  might 
have  "  freedom  to  worship  God,"  when  once  settled 
here  straightway  began  to  forget  the  lesson  which 
persecution  at  the  hands  of  their  own  Protestant 
brethren  in  the  mother  country  had  only  half 
taught  them.  The  history  of  the  New  England 
Congregational  churches  is  tragical  with  the  bitter 
wrestlings,  even  in  their  birth,  of  the  two  sons 
whom  Paul  described  as  "  the  child  of  bondage  " 
and  "  the  child  of  liberty,"  and  though  in  this  new 
age  the  child  of  liberty  named  by  Paul  "  the  child 
of  promise  "  is  fast  nearing  its  full  manhood,  the 
end  is  not  yet.     Let  it  not,  then,  be  too  hastily 


PERILS  OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY     315 

assumed  that  even  the  Protestant  portion  of  Chris- 
tendom is  wholly  free  from  its  long  inherited  curse 
of  mental  and  moral  slavery.  The  great  error  of 
the  church  has  always  been  its  assumption  of  au- 
thority over  the  souls  of  men  in  all  matters  of 
faith  and  dogma ;  and  the  natural  fruits  of  dog- 
matic authority  have  always  been  and  always  wiU 
be  insincerity,  hypocrisy,  cant,  and  aU  their  evil 
brood.  Until  that  yoke  is  completely  broken 
everywhere  in  Christendom  its  results  are  bound  to 
appear.  There  are  other  forms  of  dogmatic  bond- 
age besides  fear  of  death.  The  halter  and  the 
stake  have  indeed  been  banished.  Heterodoxy  is 
no  longer  treated  as  a  crime.  But  the  more  hid- 
den and  insidious  forms  of  theological  persecution 
—  suspicion,  prejudice,  calumny  —  have  by  no 
means  lost  their  power  ;  and  they  are  doing  their 
enslaving  work  as  truly  and  effectually  to-day, 
within  the  limits  of  the  church,  as  ever  in  its  his- 
tory. In  fact,  the  more  hidden  and  stealthy  are 
the  processes  by  which  these  intimidating  forces 
act,  the  more  effective  do  they  become,  within  the 
sphere  of  their  influence.  Kemember  that  I  am 
not  speaking  of  the  outside  world,  whose  mental 
and  religious  freedom  is  quite  complete.  It  is  the 
members  of  our  church  organizations  with  whom 
I  am  now  concerned,  who  are  under  the  sway  of 
historical  church  traditions ;  and  my  object  is  to 
make  clear  the  fact  that  the  peril  which  above  all 
others  menaces  the  church,  as  a  Christian  organi- 
zation, to-day,  is  an  inherited  virus  of  insincerity 


316  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

and  hypocrisy  whose  poison  permeates  the  whole 
body.  Does  this  statement  surprise  any  one,  and 
call  forth  protest  or  denial  ?  Let  iis,  then,  look 
facts  squarely  in  the  face.  It  is  difficult  on  such 
a  point  to  call  witnesses.  Nor  do  I  intend  to  do 
so;  but  I  make  my  appeal  to  the  inner  moral 
consciousness  of  men,  both  within  the  church  and 
without  it.  What  is  the  most  startling  fact  in  the 
present  theological  situation  ?  Is  it  not  that  our 
church  leaders  throughout  Christendom  have  been 
hiding  themselves  behind  theological  makeshifts 
of  every  kind,  setting  forth  new  truth  under  old 
labels,  or  old  truth  under  new  ones,  filling  old 
bottles  with  new  wine  or  new  bottles  with  old  in- 
gredients, so  that  hearers  are  mystified  and  left 
in  complete  theological  confusion?  Let  me  give 
a  single  illustration  from  my  own  personal  observa- 
tion. Some  years  since  I  fell  into  a  conversation 
with  a  minister  of  my  acquaintance  on  the  subject 
of  Christ's  miraculous  birth.  He  told  me  of  his 
troubles  over  it,  and  of  the  way  he  took  to  solve 
them.  He  went  to  a  friend  who  stood  in  high 
moral  as  well  as  literary  repute,  and  put  the  ques- 
tion to  him,  whether  he  believed  that  Jesus  was 
born  in  a  miraculous  way.  The  reply  came  quickly 
and  sharply :  "  Impossible  !  Impossible  !  I  can- 
not believe  it."  This  answer  from  a  man  for  whose 
moral  consciousness  the  minister  had  the  greatest 
respect  seems  to  have  ended  his  dilemma.  He 
had  made  his  appeal  to  the  practical,  intelligent, 
common  sense  of  a  highly  respected  man  of  the 


PERILS  OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY     317 

world,  and  the  answer  lie  received  seemed  to  have 
settled  the  question  for  him  completely  and  finally. 
Yet  years  after  this  occurrence  my  ministerial  ac- 
quaintance was  reciting  the  Apostles'  Creed  in  his 
church  services  every  Sunday,  in  which  are  the 
words :  "  Jesus  Christ,  who  was  conceived  by  the 
Holy  Ghost,  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary."  I  do  not 
give  this  case  as  if  it  were  remarkable.  No  doubt 
it  is  being  repeated  in  the  history  of  not  a  few 
pastors  and  churches.  Perhaps  there  are  those 
who  see  no  wrong  in  it,  and  would  defend  it  as  a 
lawful  use  of  the  "  qfficiosum  mendaciumy  But 
how  does  the  world  judge  it  ?  Will  not  the  strict- 
est moralist  declare  that  no  better  example  could 
be  given  of  a  low  moral  sense  of  what  the  law  of 
Christian  veracity  demands  ?  There  is  no  form  of 
insincerity  that  is  so  injurious  to  the  principle  of 
truthfulness  as  that  which  hides  itself  in  such  a 
way  and  wears  the  garb  of  a  pious  dissimulation. 
So  deeply  ingrained  in  our  religious  life  has  the 
habit  become  that  such  an  illustration  of  it  as  I 
have  given  no  longer  attracts  attention.  It  is  re- 
markable how  long  men  can  continue  to  live  under 
the  forms  of  an  old  tradition,  even  when  its  real 
life  is  utterly  gone.  How  true  to  nature  is  Ten- 
nyson's description  of  "  Use  and  Wont,"  — 

"  Old  sisters  of  a  day  gone  by, 

Gray  nurses,  loving  nothing  new." 

Most  men  disHke  to  be  disturbed  or  awakened  out 
of  their  intellectual  or  religious  slumbers.  Should 
another  Rip  Van  Winkle  awake  from  a  half  cen- 


318  THE  ETHNIC   TRINITIES 

tury's  nap  and  enter  one  of  our  churches  on  the 
Lord's  day  he  would  scarcely  realize  how  long  he 
had  slept.  Some  innovations  would  arrest  his  at- 
tention. The  congregation  would  take  a  somewhat 
larger  part  in  the  service,  and  a  new  note  might 
strike  his  ear  occasionally  in  the  quality  of  the 
preaching ;  but  the  general  order  of  exercises  would 
have  the  old  familiar  air.  He  would  recognize  at 
once  the  old  forms  of  Scripture  reading  with  the  old 
interpretations,  involving  the  old  assumptions,  the 
old  hymns  of  Watts  and  Wesley,  with  all  their 
crude  materialism,  the  old-time  formidas  of  prayer, 
from  prayer-books  of  the  sixteenth  century,  and 
even  from  stiU  earlier  times  ;  and  he  might  shut  his 
eyes  for  another  nap,  assured  that  all  is  well,  — 
never  realizing  that  the  most  stupendous  intellec- 
tual revolution  of  history  has  left  its  mark  on  every 
phase  of  human  thought.  I  remember  well  the 
moral  shock  which  I  experienced  when  I  first 
learned  that  the  Calvinistic  trinitarian  hymns  of 
Dr.  Watts,  which  had  fed  the  religious  faith  of 
my  childhood,  were  written  by  an  Arminianizing 
Arianizing  Sabellian.  But  in  what  respect  was 
Dr.  Watts  worse  than  ministers  and  churches  to- 
day, who  stiU  sing  his  hymns  and  others  Hke  them, 
and  excuse  themselves  by  professing  to  accept 
their  theological  truth  "for  substance  of  doc- 
trine." But  such  illustrations  are  mere  straws  on 
the  surface  of  the  deep  stream.  This  is  the  real, 
the  transcendent  issue.  Most,  if  not  all,  educated 
men  are  aware  that  the  Darwinian  law  of  evolu- 


PERILS  OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY     319 

tion  in  its  fuU  application  in  all  departments  of 
science,  and  in  historical  research,  has  radically- 
changed  aU  the  old  conceptions  of  nature,  of  man, 
and  of  God.  They  know  well  that  the  very  foun- 
dations of  the  old  traditional  theology  are  utterly- 
broken  down,  and  that  wholly  new  forms  of  truth 
must  take  their  place.  Yet  how  few  of  our  church 
leaders  are  ready  to  make  fuU  acknowledgment 
of  this,  and  honestly  take  their  stand  on  it !  A 
tacit  conspiracy  of  silence  has  shut  their  mouths. 
And  how  is  this  policy  defended  ?  It  is  said  that 
"  Kant  once  confessed  that  though  he  would  never 
say  anything  he  did  not  believe,  he  believed  many 
things  he  would  never  say  "  (Paulsen,  "  System  of 
Ethics,"  682).  Paulsen  well  adds  :  "  A  Greek 
might  have  replied  to  him,  '  In  that  case  I  do  not 
care  very  much  for  what  you  have  to  say,  for  I 
desire  to  know,  not  what  you  are  allowed  to  think 
with  the  consent  of  the  high  authorities,  but  what 
you  actually  think  yourself."  Kant  has  here  well 
expressed  the  trend  of  recent  theological  apology  as 
regards  a  full  and  honest  confession  of  Christian 
faith.  Aristotle  made  truthfulness  to  consist  in 
the  avoidance  of  two  extremes,  —  the  expression 
of  what  is  false  and  the  repression  of  what  is  true. 
It  is  the  second  extreme  —  called  by  Aristotle 
dissimulation  —  that  is  so  rife  to-day.  And  the 
Greek  pagan  was  ethically  right.  A  negative 
lie  is  as  truly  a  lie  as  a  positive  one.  Intentional 
deception,  which  is  the  essence  of  a  falsehood, 
is  equally  behind  both  forms  of  it.     A  man  who 


320  THE  ETHNIC   TRINITIES 

recites  with  a  congregation  a  creed  which  he  does 
not  believe,  except  with  a  mental  reservation,  is 
guilty  of  an  act  of  dissimulation  which  no  casuistry 
can  excuse,  and  which  the  enlightened  moral  con- 
sciousness of  every  man  must  condemn.  It  is 
the  peculiar  moral  quality  of  the  "  officiosum  men- 
daciuTYi^''  in  either  of  its  forms,  and  especially  in 
that  of  the  "  suppressio  veri^''  that  it  so  success- 
fully arrays  itself  in  angelic  garb.  To  do  a  little 
evil  that  great  good  may  come  has  been  the  favor- 
ite appeal  of  the  tempter  from  Eden  down,  and 
never  has  he  applied  his  arts  more  skiUfuUy  and 
successfully  than  in  these  recent  times  in  the  very 
heart  of  Christendom.  Strange,  indeed,  that  the 
old  Greek  Aristotle  should  become  the  ethical 
teacher  of  a  degenerate  Christianity !  Yet  not  so 
strange.  The  taint  is  in  the  very  blood  of  many 
generations.  The  old  distinctions  between  the 
church  and  the  world,  ecclesiasticism  and  secular- 
ism, religion  and  morahty,  what  is  true  and  right  in 
religious  things  and  what  is  true  and  right  in  tem- 
poral things,  —  distinctions  which  lay  behind  the 
whole  church  theory  of  the  "  officiosum  menda- 
cium^'^  —  have  not  yet  faded  out,  even  among  Pro- 
testant theologians. 

The  history  of  modern  Biblical  exegesis  furnishes 
many  memorable  illustrations  of  this.  Pious  and 
scholarly  exegetes  have  applied  canons  of  inter- 
pretation to  Scripture  which  they  would  never 
have  dared  to  apply  to  any  other  book  in  the 
world,  —  it  being  assumed  that  the  Bible,  as  the 


PERILS   OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY     321 

Word  of  God,  is  to  be  discriminated  from  aU 
human  writings,  and  so  is  to  be  interpreted  on  dif- 
ferent principles.  The  worst  of  it  is  that  these 
principles  are  often  utterly  discordant  with  ordi- 
nary rules  of  human  interpretation.  Is  it  surpris- 
ing, then,  that  such  unnatural  scriptural  exegesis 
should  often  involve  evasions  of  the  Aristotelian 
law  of  truthfulness  ?  Let  me  give  a  single  instance, 
which  I  choose  out  of  many  equally  a  propos^  be- 
cause it  brings  out  so  clearly  how  close  is  the 
affinity  between  the  theological  dissimulation  that 
infects  the  Christianity  of  to-day  and  that  of  the 
early  church.  In  the  opening  verses  of  the  sev- 
enth chapter  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  there  occurs  a, 
conversation  between  Jesus  and  his  brethren  which 
from  the  earliest  times  has  troubled  Christian 
exegetes.  "We  are  told  that  in  view  of  the  ap- 
proaching Feast  of  Tabernacles  Christ's  brethren 
ironically  urged  him  to  go  into  Judaea  and  show 
himself  publicly.  The  reply  of  Christ  was  a  simple 
refusal.  "  Go  ye  up  unto  the  feast ;  I  go  not  up 
unto  this  feast  because  my  time  is  not  yet  fulfilled.'* 
Such  was  the  reading  of  the  text  in  the  time  of 
Porphyry  and  of  Jerome.  The  later  change  from 
ovK  to  ovTTO),  which  appears  in  the  Textus  receptus^ 
and  is  translated  "  not  yet,"  in  the  King  James 
version,  was  made,  according  to  Alford,  "  to  avoid 
offense."  What  the  "offense"  was  is  made  known 
to  us  by  Jerome.  In  a  work  against  the  Pelagians, 
who  held  strongly  to  free  wiU  and  the  natural 
power  of  every  man  to  avoid  sin,  Jerome  quotes 


322  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

many  passages  of  Scripture  to  show  the  contrary. 
He  even  quotes  Christ  as  saying,  "  I  can  of  my- 
self do  nothing,"  and  then,  in  further  illustration 
of  Christ's  inability,  he  adds,  "he  denies  to  his 
brethren  that  he  is  going  up  to  the  Feast  of  Tab- 
ernacles, and  afterwards  it  is  written  that  when 
his  brethren  had  gone  up  then  he  himself  went 
up,  not  openly,  but  as  if  in  secret.  He  denied 
that  he  should  go^  and  did  what  he  had  before 
denied.  Porphyry  barks  at  this,  charging  Christ 
with  fickleness  and  inconstancy,  not  knowing  that 
all  yieldings  to  temptation  should  be  referred  to 
the  flesh  (nesciens  omnia  scandala  ad  carnem 
esse  Teferendci)^  The  things  to  be  especially  noted 
in  this  passage  from  Jerome  are  that  Jerome's  text 
had  ovK^  not  ovttw,  and  that  he  does  not  attempt 
to  evade  the  natural  meaning  of  it,  but  explains 
Christ's  evasion  of  the  truth  on  the  ground  of  his 
temptable  human  nature.  Porphyry  brought  a 
similar  charge  against  Peter  and  Paid;  and  Je- 
rome, in  his  defense  of  them,  is  led  to  give  a  curi- 
ous interpretation  of  Gal.  ii.  11-14,  asserting  that 
the  altercation  which  arose  between  Peter  and  Paul 
and  Peter's  apparent  dissimulation  were  the  result 
of  their  different  points  of  view,  and  that  really 
both  of  them  were  exercising  the  highest  Chris- 
tian prudence.  He  even  suggests  that  the  conten- 
tion between  them  was  feigned  (simulatd)  in  the 
interests  of  peace  between  Jewish  and  Gentile 
Christians,  and  he  defends  the  whole  transaction 
on  the  ground  that  dissimulation  for  the  time  may 


PERILS  OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY     323 

be  useful  (utilem  vero  simulationem  et  assumerv- 
dam  in  tempore)^  referring  to  two  Old  Testament 
examples,  that  of  Jehu  in  the  matter  of  the  priests 
of  Baal,  and  that  of  David  in  the  case  of  Abime- 
lech.  It  was  this  distinct  avowal  of  the  lawful- 
ness at  times  of  a  deception  which  involved  a  lie 
that  led  Augustine  to  write  to  Jerome  a  letter 
which  was  the  beginning  of  a  sharp  though  friendly- 
controversy.  One  of  Jerome's  letters  in  reply  is 
of  prime  importance  in  the  hi'story  of  Christian 
morals.  In  it  he  informs  Augustine  that  his  posi- 
tion was  not  new,  but  that  many  Fathers  before 
him,  especially  Origen,  had  held  the  same  view, 
and  adds  apologetically  that  they  did  not  so  much 
defend  a  lie  as  treat  it  as  an  act  of  honorable 
temporizing  and  prudence  ("  non  officio  sum  men- 
dacium  sed  honestam  dispensationem  et  pruden- 
tiam ").  Thus  Jerome  showed  himself  ready, 
with  Origen  and  others  before  him,  to  defend  the 
use  of  a  lie  even  by  Christ  in  the  interest  of  pru- 
dence and  utility.  It  did  not  even  occur  to  him 
that  a  change  from  ovk  to  ov-n-oi  would  lessen  the 
difficulty.  It  was  the  later  refinements  of  theolo- 
gical exegetes  that  led  to  the  interpolation  of  ovtto). 
But  this  refuge  has  failed  since  the  discovery  that 
the  original  text  was  ovk  rather  than  ovtto).  How 
now  were  the  words  of  Christ  to  be  defended,  and 
he  be  saved  from  an  open  falsehood  ?  Was  the 
view  of  Jerome  to  be  accepted,  which  allowed 
mendacity  on  Christ's  part,  but  excused  it  as  an 
infirmity  of  the  flesh?     The  development  of  the 


324  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

dogma  of  Christ's  absolute  sinlessness  made  it  im- 
possible. Some  other  solution  of  this  moral  puzzle 
must  be  found.  It  is  here  that  my  illustrations 
of  modern  exegesis  become  appropriate,  and  afford 
telling  evidence  of  the  tendency  to  suppress  or 
distort  the  truth  in  matters  of  religion.  Lardner, 
in  his  work  "  The  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  His- 
tory," deals  with  this  question  quite  at  length. 
He  allows  that  the  earlier  reading  was  ovk,  and 
that  Christ's  reply  to  his  brethren's  advice  was, 
"  I  go  not  up  to  the  feast."  He  then  adds :  "  Sup- 
posing this  to  be  the  true  reading,  1  see  not  any 
reason  for  the  charge  of  inconstancy,  or  of  our 
Lord's  altering  his  intention.  The  context  shows 
that  he  had  spoken  of  deferring  his  journey  to 
Jerusalem  for  a  short  time,,  not  that  he  had  re- 
solved not  to  go  at  all  to  the  feast.  He  went  to 
the  feast ;  and  he  always  intended  to  do  so  ;  but 
he  went  not  up  to  that  feast  so  soon  or  so  publicly 
as  he  did  at  some  other  seasons."  Without  rais- 
ing any  question  as  to  the  correctness  of  Dr.  Lard- 
ner's  interpretation,  I  have  this  to  say,  that  his 
explanation  does  not  exculpate  Christ  at  all,  or 
even  attempt  to,  from  the  charge  of  an  intentional 
deception  of  his  brethren.  They  could  not  read 
his  inner  intentions,  and  plainly  accepted  his  words 
in  their  natural  meaning.  The  real  question  is, 
not  whether  Christ  changed  his  mind,  but  whether 
he  deceived  his  brethren  and  meant  to  do  so,  I 
quite  agTce  with  Dr.  Lardner  that  Christ  did  not 
change  his  mind,  but  how  about  the  deception  that 


PERILS   OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY     325 

lurks  behind  Christ's  words,  "  I  go  not  up  to  this 
feast "  ?  Dr.  Lardner  here  is  silent.  How  must 
we  interpret  this  silence  ?  Did  he  wish  to  conceal 
the  difficulty  under  a  disingenuous  evasion  of  it,  or 
was  he  ready  to  excuse  Christ's  reply  as  a  lawful 
mendacium  f  I  leave  it  for  my  readers  to  judge. 
The  work  of  Dr.  Lardner  belongs  to  the  eigh- 
teenth century. 

My  second  illustration  is  from  the  commentary 
of  Dean  Alford,  whom  I  have  been  accustomed  to 
regard  as  one  of  the  noblest  and  most  honest  of 
Christian  writers.  Accepting  ovk  as  the  true  read- 
ing, and  explaining  correctly  the  reason  of  the 
later  interpolation,  Alford  then  says :  "  It  is  of 
little  import  whether  we  read  ovk  or  outtw;  the 
sense  will  be  the  same,  both  on  account  of  the 
present  ava/3atVa>  (not  avafiya-o/xaL,  which  would 
express  the  disavowal  of  an  intention  to  go  up), 
and  of  ovTTO)  afterwards.  Ovk  dj/a/JatVco  would  mean 
'  /  am  not  at  present  going  up.'  "  As  one  reads 
this  amazing  comment,  a  momentary  doubt  arises 
whether  Alford's  scholarship  was  at  fault  or  his 
moral  sincerity.  His  suggestion  that  the  use  of 
the  present,  di/aySatVo),  confines  the  act  of  going  up 
to  the  "  present  "  time  and  must  be  translated,  "  I 
am  not  at  present  going  up,"  is  in  violation  of  one 
of  the  commonest  laws  of  all  languages,  let  alone 
the  New  Testament  Greek.  How  often  do  we  use 
the  present  tense  when  the  reference  is  to  some 
future  act  ?  Buttmann,  in  his  Graromar  of  New 
Testament  Greek,  remarks  that  "  the  present  fre- 


326  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

quently  stands  when  things  still  future  are  spoken 
of,  and  consequently  comprises  within  itself  the 
future  force  of  the  word,"  and  adds  that  this 
"  phenomenon  is  common  in  all  ages  and  all  lan- 
guages." Among  other  illustrations  he  refers  to 
the  passage  now  under  discussion.  He  also  refers 
to  Matt.  XX.  18,  where  the  same  present  dvajSatVo) 
is  used  in  a  plainly  future  sense.  Winer,  in  his 
Grammar,  takes  virtually  the  same  ground,  though 
more  guardedly,  holding  that  "an  action  still 
future  is  mentioned  as  already  present,  because  it 
is  unalterably  determined."  This  is  precisely  the 
case  in  hand.  Christ  used  the  present,  "  I  go  not 
up,"  because  he  wished  his  brethren  to  understand 
it  was  not  his  intention  to  go  up.  Alford,  on  the 
contrary,  declares  that  "  the  disavowal  of  an  inten- 
tion to  go  up  "  would  require  the  future  d>'a/3i}o-o/iai. 
I  confess  that  I  am  somewhat  at  a  loss  to  give  a 
critical  judgment  on  this  curious  piece  of  exegesis. 
But  surely  Alf  ord  cannot  be  accused  of  ignorance  of 
Greek  grammar,  and  least  of  aU  of  one  of  its  most 
common  rules.  Porphyry  wrote  in  Greek  as  his 
vernacular,  and  Jerome  was  Greek  scholar  enough 
to  translate  the  New  Testament  into  Latin,  yet  it 
never  occurred  to  either  of  them  that  Christ's  use 
of  the  present  implied  that  he  meant  to  be  under- 
stood as  saying,  "  I  am  not  at  present  going  up." 
Alf  ord  was  quite  as  good  a  Greek  scholar  as  either 
Porphyry  or  Jerome.  He  must  have  known,  as 
well  as  they,  that  the  natural  interpretation  of  the 
original  text  required  the  admission  that,  if  the 


PERILS  OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY     327 

account  be  true  history,  Christ  intended  to  deceive 
his  brethren. 

How,  then,  was  AKord  led  to  write  this  extraor- 
dinary statement  ?  There  can  be  but  one  satis- 
factory answer.  He  held  as  an  article  of  faith 
that  Christ  was  God.  He  also  accepted  the 
Johannine  authorship  of  the  Fourth  Gospel.  He 
was  thus  ready  to  hold  to  the  historicity  of  all  the 
accounts  in  that  gospel,  and  to  believe  that  the 
words  here  imputed  to  Christ  were  actually  uttered 
by  him.  Here,  then,  was  an  apparent  falsehood 
put  into  Christ's  lips.  How  could  it  be  explained 
so  that  Christ's  perfect  sinlessness  might  be  left 
unimpeached?  Porphyry  had  charged  him  with 
moral  fickleness.  Jerome  had  defended  his  want 
of  truthfulness  by  referring  it  to  human  weakness. 
But  Alford  could  not  accept  either  view.  He  felt 
called  upon  to  defend  Christ's  moral  perfectness  at 
all  hazards.  Here,  then,  if  ever,  was  a  case  where 
a  "  useful  dissimulation  "  might  be  allowed,  if  not 
in  the  conduct  of  Christ  himself,  at  least  in  the 
exegesis  of  his  loyal  disciple.  If  a  more  humiliat- 
ing bit  of  commentary  can  be  found  than  this,  I 
know  not  where  to  look  for  it.  Yet,  after  aU,  Al- 
ford was  not  a  sinner  above  others.  I  have  char- 
acterized his  exegesis  of  this  passage  as  "  humiliat- 
ing," not  because  it  is  worse  than  other  examples, 
but  because  it  was  the  dernier  ressort  of  a  scholar 
usually  so  free  from  exegetical  refinements.  If  I 
am  asked  whether  I  think  that  Alford  was  con- 
scious of   any  disingenuousness,  I  reply  at  once, 


328  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

surely  not.  "  The  Life,  Journal,  and  Letters," 
edited  by  his  widow,  reveal  a  character  of  singular 
openness  and  honesty.  He  had  the  courage  of  his 
convictions.  But  he  was  a  true  son  of  the  Church 
of  England,  and  accepted  the  Nicene  Creed  with- 
out any  qualification  as  absolute  truth.  His 
churchly  conservatism  is  seen  in  his  attitude  toward 
Bishop  Colenso's  book  on  the  "  Pentateuch."  In 
a  letter  to  Colenso  he  distinguished  "  the  believing 
point  of  view "  from  "  the  unbelieving  (critical) 
point  of  view."  "The  former,"  he  said,  "assumes 
Jesus  Christ  to  have  been  the  Son  of  God.  If  he 
was,  the  Pentateuch  is  historical,  for  he  treats  it 
as  such,''''  Such  a  theological  a  priori  assumption 
strikes  at  the  root  of  the  inductive  historical 
method  of  critical  investigation.  It  is  here  that 
AKord's  deficiency  as  a  commentator  comes  clearly 
to  view.  He  was  simply  a  textual,  not  a  historical 
critic.  His  defense  of  the  Johannine  authorship 
of  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  a  good  illustration.  He 
builds  his  argument  on  the  crumbling  foundations 
of  unhistorical  legend.  Here  was  the  fatal  flaw  in 
Alford's  fitness  to  deal  with  the  passage  before  us. 
Assuming  the  strict  deity  of  Christ  and  the  com- 
plete historicity  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  how  could 
he  save  Christ  from  mendacity  except  by  a  strain- 
ing of  the  text  ?  It  is  pathetic  to  think  how  close 
at  hand  lay  the  "key  of  knowledge"  which  he 
sought  in  vain  to  find.  We  must  not  forget  that 
Alford's  "  New  Testament  "  was  published  before 
Darwin's  "  Origin  of  Species,"  and  while  historical 


PERILS   OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY     329 

criticism  was  yet  in  its  infancy.  Could  lie  only 
have  grasped  the  historical  fact  that  the  Fourth 
Gospel  is  not  Johannine,  but  the  work  of  an  un- 
known writer  of  the  middle  of  the  second  century, 
and  that  the  long  conversations  and  discourses  im- 
puted to  Christ  are  not  to  be  regarded  as  really 
his  beyond  certain  logia  which  tradition  had 
brought  down  from  Apostolic  times,  how  different 
would  his  exegesis  have  been  ?  I  confess,  for  my- 
seK,  that  if  the  light  I  have  gained  on  the  "  Jo- 
hannine Problem  "  had  brought  me  no  other  boon 
than  this,  that  Christ  is  thereby  saved  for  me  from 
Porphyry's  charge  of  fickleness  and  from  Jerome's 
acknowledgment  of  falsehood,  or  from  the  lame 
defenses  of  later  exegetes  such  as  Lardner  and 
AKord,  I  should  be  more  than  repaid  for  my  long 
and  anxious  search.  If  the  words,  "  I  go  not  up," 
were  not  actually  spoken  by  Christ,  but  were  the 
work  of  a  writer  a  century  after  Christ's  death, 
then  Christ  is  absolved  from  all  responsibility  for 
them;  and  the  law  of  truthfulness  and  sincerity 
which  he  proclaimed  so  plaiuly  in  the  Sermon  on 
the  Mount  stands  unmoved  and  secure. 

Yet  this  should  be  said  iu  palliation  of  Alford's 
remarkable  interpretation.  He  was  the  victim  of 
his  theological  environment,  —  an  environment 
that  was  the  outcome  of  a  long  evolution  of  theo- 
logical exegesis  which  rested  on  the  ethical 
theory  that  the  officiosum  mendacium  was  lawfid 
when  the  interests  of  dogmatic  truth  required  it. 
Augustine's   passionate   protest   against  the   ten- 


330  THE  ETHNIC   TRINITIES 

dency  of  his  age  had  been  without  avail.  Jerome, 
Lardner,  Alford,  are  only  straws  showing  whither 
the  currents  of  exegetical  ethics  have  been  flow- 
ing during  the  entire  history  of  Christianity  down 
to  the  present  day. 

Let  me  add  one  or  two  further  examples  of  the 
manner  in  which  other  distinguished  commenta- 
tors of  the  conservative  school  have  dealt  with  the 
passage  that  has  been  under  consideration.  Few 
men  of  the  nineteenth  century  were  more  famous 
for  evangelical  piety  and  learning  than  the  German 
Tholuck.  In  his  commentary  on  John  he  thus 
remarks  on  vii.  8,  "If  we  foUow  the  external 
authority  of  the  Codices  the  reading  of  owo)  must 
be  preferred.  But  it  may  be  asked,  whether  apolo- 
getic considerations  have  not  given  the  preference 
to  oviro)  before  ovkJ*  After  referring  to  Porphyry's 
charge  of  fickleness  and  to  Jerome's  defense,  both 
grounded  on  the  earlier  reading  ovk,  Tholuck  adds : 
"  But  if  with  Bengel,  Griesbach,  and  KJaapp  we 
should  read  ov/c,  no  objection  could  be  brought 
against  it.  In  a  loose  manner  of  speaking  it  may 
become  synonymous  with  ovttcd,  as  is  clearly  the 
case  in  vi.  17."  The  case  of  vi.  17  is  not  so 
"  clear,"  and  in  fact  has  no  relation  to  the  case  in 
hand.  But  if  it  had  it  would  not  help  us.  Sup- 
pose we  allow  that  Christ  spoke  loosely^  using  ovk 
in  the  sense  of  ovtto),  the  question  is,  did  his  breth- 
ren understand  that  he  spoke  loosely  and  meant  to 
tell  them  that  he  was  simply  deferring  his  visit  to 
Jerusalem,  or  did  they  understand  him  to  say  and 


PERILS  OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY     331 

mean  that  lie  was  not  going  up  at  aU  ?  The  con- 
text surely  can  bear  but  one  interpretation.  They 
did  not  suppose  that  he  used  ovk  "  in  a  loose 
manner."  Did  Christ,  then,  intend  to  mislead 
them  by  a  douhle-entendre^  and  if  so,  could  a  will- 
ful deception  be  more  complete  ?  In  this  quandary 
Tholuck  leaves  us  to  our  own  devices.  Comment 
surely  is  unnecessary. 

I  now  turn  to  a  commentator  who  on  the  whole 
is  to  be  regarded  as  the  leading  living  exegetical 
scholar  in  the  English  church  of  the  present 
generation,  as  was  shown  by  his  being  made 
chairman  of  the  British  New  Testament  Revision 
Company.  I  refer  to  Bishop  EUicott.  His  inter- 
pretation occurs  in  his  "  Life  of  Christ "  (Am. 
ed.  227).  EUicott  rejects  Meyers's  supposition 
that  Christ  "  here  states  his  intention  and  after- 
wards alters  it "  as  not  borne  out  by  the  context, 
as  it  certainly  is  not.  He  also  rejects  "  the  ex- 
planation of  De  Wette  and  Alford "  which  I 
have  given  above,  on  the  ground  that  "  it  seems 
neither  so  simple  nor  so  natural"  as  his  own, 
though  he  allows  that  it  "is  perhaps  defensible." 
What  now  is  the  exegesis  which  EUicott  prefers 
to  the  others  mentioned  and  squarely  adopts  as 
one  that  removes  "  the  apparent  contradiction  that 
has  been  found  between  our  Lord's  words  and 
his  subsequent  acts  "  ?  He  makes  the  key  to  his 
explanation  what  he  regards  as  a  pecuUar  char- 
acteristic of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  namely,  that  Christ 
is  everywhere  represented  as  "  the  reader  of  the 


332  THE  ETHNIC   TRINITIES 

thoughts  and  intents  of  the  human  heart,"  and 
thus  in  his  conversations  with  men  "  did  not  so 
much  reply  to  the  words  of  the  speaker  as  to  the 
thoughts  which  he  knew  were  rising  up  within." 
This  he  uses  as  a  principle  of  interpretation  in 
John  vii.  8.  Christ's  brethren  asked  him  whether 
he  was  going  up  to  the  feast.  But  the  question 
implied  "  a  worldly  and  self-seeking  spirit."  They 
wished  him  to  go  publicly  and  announce  him- 
self in  a  way  to  draw  general  attention.  "  It  is 
to  the  spirit  and  meaning  of  this  worldly  and  self- 
seeking  request,  rather  than  to  the  outward  terms 
in  which  it  was  couched,  that  the  Lord  answered 
his  brethren."  "  He  does  indeed  not  go  up  to  the 
feast  in  the  sense  in  which  these  carnal-minded 
men  presumed  to  counsel  him.  He  joins  now  no 
festal  company ;  he  takes  now  no  prominent  part 
in  the  festival  solemnities."  But  he  goes  all  the 
same^  in  another  sense  of  his  language,  which 
sense,  however,  is  of  course  wholly  subjective  and 
not  understood  by  his  brethren,  who  took  his  words 
literally  and  not  spiritually.  Such  is  Ellicott's 
explanation,  which  does  not  explain,  for  it  leaves 
Christ  in  a  worse  moral  plight  than  either  of  the 
other  interpretations,  since  it  makes  him  deliher- 
ately  use  a  form  of  answer  which  he  knew  would 
wholly  deceive  them.  It  is  assumed,  of  course,  by 
EUicott  that  Christ  was  f  uUy  aware  of  the  charac- 
ter of  their  question,  that  it  referred  to  his  going 
up  and  not  merely  to  the  manner  of  it,  and  that 
his  reply  was  not  to  their  question^  but  to  a  new 


PERILS  OF  ORGANIZED   CHRISTIANITY     333 

question  which  he  had  drawn  out  of  it.  Yet 
Bishop  Ellicott  seems  entirely  satisfied  with  this 
explanation  as  saving  Christ  from  untruthfulness. 
I  am  not  here  concerned  whether  this  method  of 
exegesis  has  absolved  Christ  from  the  moral  de- 
linquency in  which  the  authentic  text  of  this 
passage  seems  to  involve  him.  My  view  of  the 
history  of  the  text  makes  such  a  method  wholly 
unnecessary.  What  concerns  me  is,  whether  it 
can  absolve  Bishop  Ellicott  himself  from  a  like 
delinquency.  What  must  one  think  of  the  fine- 
ness of  moral  fibre  of  a  Christian  commentator 
who  can  descend  to  such  a  miserable  "  wresting 
of  the  Scriptures  "  as  this,  —  "  Scriptures,"  be 
it  noted,  which  Bishop  Ellicott  regards  as  super- 
naturally  inspired,  and,  in  the  case  in  question, 
the  very  language  of  the  divine  Son  of  God! 
Far  be  it  from  me  even  to  suggest  a  suspicion 
that  this  eminent  prelate  has  juggled  with  his  con- 
science in  his  scholarly  commentaries.  Like  Al- 
ford,  Tholuck,  and  others,  he  was  the  creature  of 
his  age  and  of  its  traditional  environment,  and 
he  only  illustrates,  in  the  very  headquarters  of 
official  churchmanship,  that  hereditary  moral  taint 
the  sources  of  which  I  have  traced  back  to  the 
origins  of  Christianity.  I  will  only  add  that 
this  comment  of  Bishop  Ellicott  is  one  of  the 
worst  specimens  on  record,  in  my  view,  of  the 
spiritualizing  method  of  interpretation  which  has 
been  so  popular  in  recent  exegesis,  and  which  is 
full  of  evidence  of  the  unconscious  disingenuous- 


334  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

ness  and  insincerity  that  is   so  ingrained  in  the 
theological  temper  of  our  age. 

I  have  dwelt  thus  at  length  on  the  subject  of 
Biblical  interpretation,  because  it  gives  so  clear 
and  conclusive  evidence  of  the  results  of  the 
theory  of  the  officiosum  mendacium  which  has 
played  so  influential  a  part  in  Christian  theology 
and  life.  Christian  exegetical  scholars  have  as  a 
rule  been  more  free  from  the  yoke  of  theological 
dogma  than  professed  dogmatic  theologians.  Je- 
rome was  much  more  free  in  his  exegetical  views 
than  Augustine.  Alford  was  by  no  means  a 
hard-and-fast  dogmatist.  If  the  exegetes  can  go 
so  far  in  textual  distortion  to  save  an  article  of 
the  orthodox  creed,  what  may  we  expect  of  the 
metaphysical  theologians?  And  if  both  exegetes 
and  theologians  are  ready  to  play  fast  and  loose 
with  the  law  of  veracity  when  the  interests  of 
what  they  regard  as  the  truth  demand  it,  what 
must  we  expect  of  the  rank  and  file  of  Christians 
who  have  been  accustomed  to  reverence  and  follow 
their  chosen  leaders?  Can  we  wonder  that  our 
churches  are  honeycombed  with  elements  of  in- 
sincerity and  hypocrisy,  or  that  the  world  is  ready 
to  ask  whether  Christianity  itself  in  its  organized 
form,  judging  it  by  its  moral  exhibitions,  is  not 
an  imposture  and  a  sham  ?  Surely,  before  the 
church  can  hope  to  convert  nominal  Christendom, 
still  further,  before  it  can  become  a  missionary 
force  that  shall  conquer  the  unchristian  world,  it 
mvi&t  first  he  converted  itself. 


PERILS  OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY     335 

These  words  may  have  a  severe  and  pessimistic 
sound.  But  the  writer  is  no  pessimist.  No  one 
can  despair  of  the  future  who  reads  with  any  clear 
intelligence  the  signs  of  the  times.  Outside  of 
the  church  at  least  there  is  readiness  for  the  light, 
and  freedom  of  thought,  and  an  end  of  religious 
bigotry  and  dishonesty.  And  these  moral  forces 
are  beginning  to  react  on  the  church  itself  with 
silent  but  irresistible  potency.  Marvelous  indeed 
would  it  be  if  it  should  come  to  pass  that  the 
unrecognized  outside  "  sleeping  partners  "  of  the 
true  kingdom  of  God  should  be  the  real  leaders  in 
the  moral  progress  of  the  race,  rather  than  the 
historical  organizations  that  have  so  long  assumed 
to  be  the  only  representatives  of  Christianity. 
Already  such  a  movement  has  taken  visible  shape. 
The  Zeitgeist  is  becoming  conscious  of  its  power. 
Organization,  however  deeply  seated  in  old  tra- 
ditions, has  ceased  to  be  a  fetich.  The  light  of 
God's  truth  is  as  universal  as  that  of  the  sun,  and 
cannot  be  shut  up  in  anybody's  lantern,  call  that 
lantern  by  any  sacred  name  you  wiU.  It  is  this 
that  the  world  is  finding  out  to-day,  —  thanks  to 
the  new  science  and  the  new  history.  The  church, 
too,  must  soon  learn  the  same  lesson.  It  cannot 
continue  much  longer  to  resist  the  influences 
around  it.  Its  closed  doors  and  windows  must 
be  thrown  wide  open  to  the  free  air  and  light  of 
heaven.  And  just  here  wiU  begin  the  church's  true 
regeneration.  With  freedom  will  quickly  come 
an   end   of  ignorance  and  of  insincerity.      Then 


336  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

with  open  eyes  men  will  read  God's  new  revela- 
tions. Then  it  will  be  seen  that  the  new  truths  of 
science  and  of  historical  criticism  are  not  of  man's 
building.  Charles  Darwin  was  not  the  author  of 
that  wonderful  law  of  evolution  which  is  revolu- 
tionizing all  our  conceptions  of  nature,  of  man,  and 
of  God.  He  only  discovered  what  God  himself  in 
his  own  time  had  revealed,  or,  if  one  pleases,  what 
nature  had  disclosed  of  its  previously  hidden  pro- 
cesses as  the  providential  interpreter  of  Him  whose 
works  are  "  parts  of  his  ways."  Surely  in  these 
days  of  God's  outstretched  hand  human  pride 
should  give  place  to  humility.  Man's  wisdom  has 
indeed  proved  "  foolishness."  The  garnered  philo- 
sophy of  ages  has  shriveled  up  as  a  scroll  in  the 
fire  that  tries  every  man's  works.  And  why 
should  we  cling  to  it  or  regret  it  ?  The  old  monk's 
counsel  was  good :  "  Regret  not  that  which  is 
past."  This  is  a  day  of  promise  and  hope,  not  of 
unavailing  regrets ;  a  day  of  faith,  not  of  skepti- 
cism ;  a  day  of  optimistic  courage  and  cheer,  not  of 
pessimistic  lamentations.  And  in  that  hope  and 
faith  and  cheer  I  seem  to  catch  a  vision  of  the 
days  to  come.  Christianity  has  been  like  one  of 
those  old  palimpsests  where  the  original  writing 
was  buried  and  lost  under  a  later  script.  Christ's 
own  gospel  had  been  transformed  into  "another 
gospel  which  was  not  a  gospel."  But  God's  provi- 
dence has  given  us  the  subtle  critical  art  by  means 
of  which  the  legendary  accumulations  of  long  ages 
have  been  removed,  and  the  original  teachings  of 


PERILS  OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY     337 

Christ  once  more  brought  out  clearly  to  view  ; 
and  lo,  as  I  look  on  that  old  standard  under  which 
Christianity  has  so  long  fought,  with  its  theological 
shibboleths,  —  dead  embers  of  forgotten  contro- 
versies, —  a  sudden  and  marvelous  change  comes 
over  it ;  its  traditional  dogmatic  creeds  disappear 
like  a  mist  of  the  morning,  and  in  their  place  I 
read  those  recovered  words  of  Christ  which  sum  up 
his  whole  gospel :  "  A  new  commandment  I  give 
unto  you,  that  ye  love  one  another.  By  this  shall 
all  men  know  that  ye  are  my  disciples,  if  ye  have 
love  one  to  another :  "  and  yet  again  the  scene 
shifts  and  the  vision  of  the  seer  of  Patmos  is 
fulfilled  :  "  I  saw  no  temple  therein :  for  the  Lord 
God  Almighty  and  the  Lamb  are  the  temple  of  it. 
And  the  city  had  no  need  of  the  sun,  neither  of 
the  moon,  to  shine  in  it :  for  the  glory  of  God  did 
lighten  it,  and  the  Lamb  is  the  light  thereof.  And 
the  nations  of  them  which  are  saved  shall  walk  in 
the  light  of  it :  and  the  kings  of  the  earth  do 
bring  their  glory  and  honor  into  it.  And  the  gates 
of  it  shall  not  be  shut  at  all  by  day:  for  there 
shall  be  no  night  there.  And  they  shall  bring  the 
glory  and  honor  of  the  nations  into  it."  What 
city  is  here  described  ?  Not  any  outward  city  of 
man's  making,  with  its  "  temples "  and  "  shut 
gates  ;  "  but  the  "  New  Jerusalem,  coming  from 
God  out  of  heaven."  In  that  city,  open  and  free, 
and  illumined  by  the  sun  of  God's  righteous 
love,  ''all  the  nations  shall  walk,"  and  "there 
shall  be  no  night  there." 


338  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

What  interpretation  should  be  given  to  this 
apocalyptic  passage  cannot  be  exactly  determined. 
All  apocalypse,  as  Neander  has  well  said,  has  a 
"germinant  and  springing  meaning  and  accom- 
plishment." The  Revelation  does  not  claim  to  be 
history.  It  belongs  to  the  realm  of  mystical  theo- 
logy, and  must  be  interpreted  by  mystical  or  sym- 
bolical methods.  Moreover,  the  authorship  of  the 
Revelation  is  unknown,  so  that  it  is  impossible  to 
gain  light  from  the  author's  environment  or  reli- 
gious point  of  view.  Yet,  notwithstanding  all  this, 
I  cannot  think  that  the  radical  thought  of  the 
writer  is  doubtful.  Whoever  he  was,  he  had 
plainly  somehow  caught  a  glimpse  of  the  final  evo- 
lution of  God's  kingdom  on  earth,  and  sought  to 
picture  it  in  apocalyptic  form.  Beneath  all  its 
imagery  three  characteristics  of  the  end  of  all 
things  stand  out  clearly  to  view :  1.  A  world-wide 
united  brotherhood  of  God's  people.  2.  God's  own 
presence  in  their  midst,  making  needless  material 
gates  for  protection  or  material  temples  for  wor- 
ship. 3.  A  final  state  of  perfect  harmony  and 
peace  and  joy ;  —  which  being  translated  into  the 
new  historical  apocalypse  of  our  own  day  should 
read  thus  :  1.  The  harmonizing  and  union  of  all 
the  hitherto  warring  religions  of  the  world  through 
Christ's  gospel,  with  its  new  interpretation  of  di- 
vine and  brotherly  love.  2.  The  tabernacling  of 
God  among  men  through  his  seK-revelations  as 
immanent  in  nature,  in  the  world,  and  in  all  human 
souls,  and  thus  becoming  the  spiritual  bond  of  one 


PERILS  OF  ORGANIZED  CHRISTIANITY     339 

universal  kingdom  of  truth  and  justice.  3.  The 
£aial  consummation  of  aU  things  in  a  world-wide 
moral  unity  and  peace. 

Eighteen  centuries  have  gone  since  the  Kevela- 
tion  was  written.  Its  jubilant  hope,  expressed  in 
"  Behold  I  come  quickly,"  still  remains  an  unful- 
filled ideal.  It  has  been  one  of  the  objects  of  this 
book  to  disclose  some  of  the  historical  causes  of 
the  delay  of  God's  coming. 


or 


CHAPTER  Vni 

THE  NEW  PROBLEM  OF  THEOLOGY  IN  THE 
TWENTIETH  CENTURY 

This  comparative  historical  survey  has  on  the 
practical  side  reached  its  appropriate  conclusion. 
But  there  stiU  remains  a  question  which  cannot  be 
without  interest  to  aU  Christian  thinkers.  Reli- 
gious faith  must  by  a  law  of  the  human  mind 
sooner  or  later  be  subjected  to  the  inquisition  of 
the  reason  and  its  critical  processes.  History  shows 
that  every  religion  tends  to  become  a  theology,  and 
to  guard  and  limit  itself  with  a  dogmatic  creed. 
Hence  the  historical  inductive  method  is  called  to 
deal  not  only  with  the  history  of  religions,  but  also 
with  their  theological  developments. 

We  have  now  reached  a  point  of  view  where  a 
comprehensive  survey  may  be  taken  of  the  present 
religious  possessions  of  the  world  and  of  their  in- 
tellectual and  theological  relations  to  each  other. 
In  this  way  by  the  inductive  process  the  founda- 
tions may  be  laid  of  the  new  theology  which  is 
to  come. 

It  wiU  be  the  aim  of  this  chapter  to  set  forth 
the  real  character  of  the  new  theological  problem 
which  the  twentieth  century  finds  at  its  door.   This 


THE  NEW  PROBLEM  OF  THEOLOGY   341 

problem  has  two  distinct  sides  or  aspects.  One 
aspect  of  it  has  to  do  with  the  relation  of  religion 
to  those  scientific  discoveries  which  have  created 
for  man  in  the  new  revelations  of  nature  and  its 
laws  a  new  world.  The  other  aspect  of  the  pro- 
blem grows  out  of  those  historical  and  critical  in- 
vestigations which  have  developed  an  entirely  new 
conception  not  only  of  the  historical  origins  of 
Christianity,  but  also  of  the  origins  and  character 
of  the  Ethnic  religions.  The  results  of  science 
and  of  the  history  of  religions  have  together  so 
transformed  the  whole  field  of  religious  faith  and 
thought  that  a  new  philosophical  or  theological 
construction  has  become  inevitable. 

It  is  not  my  purpose  to  go  over  again  the  ground 
of  my  previous  book.  I  do  not  propose  now  any 
further  attempt  at  a  construction  of  the  new  theo- 
logy. What  I  have  in  mind  is  simply,  from  the 
wider  and  higher  vantage  ground  reached  in  this 
historical  survey  of  the  trinitarian  ideas  of  man- 
kind concerning  God,  to  put  the  new  theological 
problem  thus  raised  in  its  true  historical  setting, 
and  thus  to  help  towards  its  solution.  Such  a  pre- 
liminary analysis  and  diagnosis  is  most  needful. 
Physicians  of  every  school  are  always  with  us.  But 
most  of  the  attempts  to  heal  the  religious  maladies 
of  our  times  have  been  of  two  sorts  :  "  Forward 
Movements"  in  the  churches  and  in  missionary 
organizations  and  "  Reconstructions  in  Theology." 
Plainly  the  theological  doctors  have  become  alive 
to  the  fact  that  the  patient  is  dangerously  ill ;  but 


342  THE  ETHHIC  TRINITIES 

as  to  the  character  of  the  disease  and  the  medicine 
to  be  administered  there  is  great  diversity  of  opin- 
ion. The  mere  list  of  remedies  suggested  only- 
shows  how  much  at  sea  the  physicians  are.  As 
usual  the  traditionalists  and  metaphysicians  are  on 
hand  with  the  old  prescriptions.  The  question  is 
whether  it  is  not  high  time  for  the  historical  doctor 
to  say  his  say.  Strauss's  keen  and  searching  re- 
mark, "  The  true  criticism  of  dogma  is  its  history," 
may  prove  to  be  the  very  key  we  need.  What 
lasting  good  can  come  from  "  forward  movements  " 
or  from  "  theological  reconstructions,"  if  they  pro- 
ceed by  wrong  roads  to  take  us  only  further  away 
from  the  end  sought?  The  right  start  must  be 
made  and  the  right  line  of  direction  taken,  if  a 
Christian  advance  is  to  issue  in  a  final  success  and 
not  in  inglorious  failure.  To  learn  what  the  right 
start  is  and  what  the  right  line  of  direction,  we 
need  to  use  carefuUy  and  thoroughly  the  search- 
lights of  history.  Such  is  the  form  of  investiga- 
tion now  proposed. 

"  The  new  problem  of  theology  in  the  twentieth 
century "  suggests  at  once  a  historical  contrast 
with  the  problem  of  the  century  just  closed.  What 
was  that  problem  and  how  was  it  solved  ?  When 
the  last  century  opened,  the  old  theology  in  its 
most  rigid  and  scholastic  form  held  the  field  and 
was  regnant  in  all  orthodox  circles.  This  theology 
had  two  poles,  a  Sabellianized  trinitarianism, 
and  a  Calvinistic  anthropology,  which,  however, 
was  rapidly  yielding  to  the  dissolving  influence  of 


THE  NEW  PROBLEM  OF  THEOLOGY   343 

Arminian  ideas.  The  old  creeds,  however,  remained 
intact  and  firm.  Scientists  and  historical  critics 
were  quietly  pursuing  their  investigations  into 
nature  and  the  sources  of  history,  but  their  dis- 
coveries created  no  general  alarm.  Not  tiU  the 
middle  of  the  century  was  the  inevitable  and  essen- 
tial antagonism  between  scientific  and  historical 
studies  and  the  dogmas  of  traditional  theology  fully 
realized.  Then  followed  a  mortal  conflict  between 
the  radical  and  vital  principle  of  all  science  and 
historical  criticism,  —  summed  up  in  the  Darwin- 
ian law  of  uninterrupted  natural  evolution,  —  and 
the  traditional  a  'priori  principle  of  a  supernatural 
intervention  by  special  creation  and  miracle  as  the 
true  historical  explanation  of  the  course  of  nature 
and  of  human  events.  This  conflict,  if  we  look  at 
the  nineteenth  century  from  its  theological  side, 
marks  more  deeply  and  characteristically  than  any 
other  its  history  as  a  whole.  Consciously  or  un- 
consciously, all  theological  discussions  and  move- 
ments of  any  importance  have  taken  their  cue  from 
the  attitude  of  theologians  toward  the  Darwinian 
doctrine  of  nature.  For  a  generation  after  the 
publication  of  "  The  Origin  of  Species  "  the  whole 
theological  air  was  filled  with  the  dust  that  was 
raised  by  dogmatic  or  timid  theologians.  But  a 
strange  lull  has  recently  fallen  upon  the  field  of 
debate,  for  reasons  that  are  too  plain  to  remain 
doubtful.  The  truth  is  that  it  has  become  clear  to 
the  mass  of  intelligent  men  and  women  that  if 
there  is  any  radical  antagonism  between  the  ascer- 


344  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

tained  facts  of  science  and  historical  criticism  and 
the  traditional  dogmas  of  the  old  orthodoxy,  it 
must  mean  that  these  dogmas  are  invalid  and  false. 
In  fact,  the  new  science  and  the  new  history  have 
come  to  stay.  The  educated  world  has  already  ac- 
cepted their  fundamental  premises  and  conclusions, 
however  doubtful  it  may  be  as  to  certain  subordi- 
nate questions.  Thus  the  ground  has  been  made 
historically  clear  for  the  new  problem  of  theology 
in  the  century  to  come.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
as  to  what  its  fundamental  character  must  be. 
The  century  is  to  be  marked  by  the  complete  har- 
monizing  and  unifying  of  scientific,  historical,  and 
religious  truth.  That  this  process  will  involve  the 
utter  downfall  of  the  old  theology  in  its  traditional 
creed  forms  goes  without  saying.  It  must  disap- 
pear with  the  old  false  science  and  history  on  which 
it  was  built,  —  as,  for  example,  those  exploded 
theories  of  creation  as  wrought  in  six  days,  of  our 
earth  as  the  centre  of  the  universe,  of  a  material 
heaven  beyond  the  circumference  of  the  starry 
vault,  of  a  material  heU  deep  in  the  centre  of  the 
earth,  of  the  aerial  region  above  and  around  us  as 
filled  with  supernatural  beings  both  good  and  bad, 
of  men  as  subject  in  both  body  and  soul  to  the 
"  prince  of  the  power  of  the  air,"  through  bewitch- 
ment or  actual  demoniacal  possession,  of  this  world 
as  given  over  by  God  because  of  Adam's  sin  and 
fall  to  Satan,  and  thus  made  the  scene  of  conflict 
between  two  spiritual  kingdoms  only  to  be  termi- 
nated by  the  miraculous  coming  of  the  Son  of  God 


THE  NEW  PROBLEM  OF  THEOLOGY   345 

for  the  everlasting  destruction  of  evil  and  triumph 
of  good.  This  whole  mass  of  traditional  supersti- 
tion, which  belongs  essentially  to  one  and  the  same 
class  of  uncritical  beliefs,  is  rapidly  dissolving  like 
snow  under  the  sun  of  summer  and  is  giving  place 
to  a  new  order  of  religious  ideas  proceeding  from  a 
new  scientific  and  critical  principle  of  eternal  and 
unchangeable  law.  Such  is  the  problem  in  one 
aspect  of  it.  Of  course  there  are  still  many  who 
would  protest  loudly  against  such  a  historical  re- 
sume and  forecast.  Organized  Christianity,  which 
hugs  so  tenaciously  its  historical  traditions,  will 
not  give  them  up  without  a  final  struggle ;  but  I 
believe  that  I  am  safe,  as  a  historical  observer,  in 
the  assertion  that  the  decisive  battle  between 
science  and  religion  is  at  an  end,  and  that,  so  far 
as  there  was  any  real  ground  of  conflict  growing 
out  of  dogmas  that  were  supposed  to  be  essential 
to  religious  faith,  science  and  its  ally  historical 
criticism  have  come  off  victors.  The  final  cowp  de 
grace  was  given  by  historical  criticism.  The  de- 
fenders of  a  miraculous  Christianity  have  rested 
their  arguments  on  the  assumption  that  the  Bible 
was  a  direct  divine  revelation,  and  that  conse- 
quently its  narratives  were  authentic  history.  His- 
torical criticism  has  destroyed  the  very  basis  of  this 
position  by  showing  that  its  primary  assumptions 
are  untenable. 

If  one  would  realize  how  complete  a  change  has 
been  wrought  in  a  single  generation,  as  the  result 
of  critical  research,  let  him  look  into  a  work  of 


346  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

Dr.  McCosh  entitled  "  The  Supernatural  in  Kelar 
tion  to  the  Natural,"  published  in  1862.  Appar- 
ently Dr.  McCosh  was  not  aware  that  Darwin's 
epoch-making  book  had  already  appeared  three 
years  before.  At  least  he  does  not  allude  to  it  in 
his  own  volume,  though  he  was  quite  a  scientific 
student  and  accepted  much  of  the  science  of  his 
day,  especially  the  new  astronomy  and  geology. 
Certainly  had  he  realized  what  was  the  radically 
new  position  taken  by  Darwin  as  to  the  character 
of  the  origin  and  mode  of  development  of  nature 
in  all  its  forms,  he  would  have  met  it  with  an 
earnest  demurrer,  for  he  held  strongly  in  his  book 
to  special  acts  of  divine  creation,  and  to  the  con- 
tinuance of  the  miraculous  element  in  history. 
The  naive  way  in  which  Dr.  McCosh  makes  use 
of  certain  portions  of  the  Bible,  assuming  without 
question  their  entire  historicity,  is  truly  astonish- 
ing. For  example,  he  alludes  to  the  account  in 
the  book  of  Daniel  of  "  the  three  children  of  Israel 
who  were  thrown  into  the  fiery  furnace  in  Baby- 
lon "  without  a  hint  that  it  may  not  be  accepted 
fact.  So  concerning  Balaam's  ass,  he  asserts  that 
"  We  know  enough  to  convince  us  that  the  ass  could 
not  speak  except  by  a  supernatural  agency  work- 
ing in  it,"  never  once  suggesting  a  doubt  whether 
the  ass  did  actually  speak  in  human  language. 
On  the  same  principle  he  declares  that  the  prophe- 
cies of  the  Old  Testament  were  predictions  of  defi- 
nite future  historical  events,  "  foretold  hundreds 
or   thousands   of  years   beforehand,"   and   hence 


THE  NEW  PROBLEM  OF  THEOLOGY   347 

must  be  regarded  as  proofs  of  miraculous  power 
and  agency.  He  accepts  the  entire  historicity  of 
the  narrative  given  in  "The  Acts"  concerning 
what  happened  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  assuming 
with  the  completest  assurance  that  "  uneducated 
fishermen  at  once,  without  having  been  taught, 
addressed  a  multitude  of  persons  gathered  from  a 
variety  of  countries  each  in  his  own  language." 
How  utterly  the  foundations  of  Dr.  McCosh's 
whole  argument  have  been  undermined  by  Biblical 
criticism  I  need  not  say.  What  critical  scholar 
to-day  accepts  the  fuU  historicity  of  any  of  these 
Scripture  accounts?  When  Dr.  McCosh  laid 
down  his  primary  philosophical  thesis  "  that  it  is 
not  possible  for  the  inductive  philosophers  to  be 
able  to  establish  the  doctrine  of  the  uniformity  of 
nature  as  a  law  which  can  admit  of  no  excep- 
tions,^^ he  surely  little  realized  that  a  book  was  al- 
ready in  existence  which  would  prove  just  such  a 
uniformity  of  nature  in  the  case  of  species,  —  the 
very  case  which  Dr.  McCosh  had  relied  upon  as 
the  citadel  of  his  own  position.  There  are  some 
to-day,  apparently,  who  are  leaning  on  the  same 
broken  reed.  They  are  ready  to  accept  the  law  of 
evolution  to  a  certain  point,  but  refuse  to  allow 
that  there  are  no  exceptions  to  it.  Dr.  Lyman 
Abbott,  for  example,  admits  the  law  to  be  invio- 
lable and  universal  with  a  single  exception,  to  wit, 
the  miraculous  birth  of  Christ.  But  if  one  event 
can  lie  outside  of  the  law,  what  becomes  of  the  law 
itself?     A  law  of   nature  can  no  more  allow  a 


348  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

single  breach  than  a  chain,  the  strength  of  which 
is  gone  if  a  single  link  be  broken.  The  Darwinian 
law  of  natural  evolution  is  true,  unchangeably, 
and  universally,  or  it  is  utterly  false,  and  to  be 
cast  aside  as  unscientific. 

In  dealing  thus  with  Dr.  McCosh's  book,  I  feel 
as  if  I  were  stirring  the  flickering  embers  of  a 
dead  issue.  I  have  done  so  because  I  know  of  no 
better  way  to  show  how  far  behind  us  already  have 
those  theological  questions  drifted  which  some 
would  assume  to  be  still  alive  and  mooted  among 
us.  In  fact,  when  they  are  raised  now  and  then, 
there  is  no  attempt  to  answer  them ;  the  time  and 
need  of  such  discussion  has  gone  irretrievably  by. 
The  law  of  natural  evolution  so  signally  proved 
and  illustrated  by  Darwin  in  its  application  to  all 
species  of  organic  life,  including  man,  is  equally 
applicable  in  every  other  field  of  nature.  Take 
the  case  of  miracles.  There  are  those  who  are 
ready  to  give  up  all  miracles  outside  of  the  Bible, 
or  even  of  the  New  Testament,  but  insist  on  the 
retention  of  the  latter  as  if  Christianity  itself  de- 
pended on  their  historical  reality.  But  if  the 
principle  of  the  uniformity  of  nature  has  ever  been 
broken  once,  by  a  single  miraculous  act  through 
which  natural  law  was  violated  or  suspended,  then 
the  essential  character  of  law  has  been  invaded 
and  a  principle  of  natural  disorder  and  contin- 
gency has  been  introduced,  which  makes  the  uni- 
verse the  sport  of  chance,  and  its  essential  charac- 
ter as  a  cosmos  is  gone.     It  is  just  as  difficult  for 


THE  NEW  PROBLEM  OF  THEOLOGY   349 

the  scientific  or  historical  critic  to  accept  a  single 
miracle,  in  its  theological  meaning  of  a  violation 
or  suspension  of  law,  as  to  accept  a  thousand. 

Here,  then,  comes  to  view  the  very  starting-point 
of  any  satisfactory  and  lasting  solution  of  the  new 
problem  of  theology.  No  haH-way  measures  —  no 
compromises  between  two  antagonistic  positions  — 
can  stand.  There  can  be  no  real  harmonizing  of 
science  and  theology  except  on  the  basis  of  a 
complete  and  unwavering  acceptance  of  scientific 
principles  and  laws  in  all  their  widest  applica- 
tions. To  attempt  to  revive  the  old  discredited 
controversies  of  the  nineteenth  century  is  a  histor- 
ical anachronism.  Evolution,  as  I  have  said,  is 
all  true  or  it  is  all  false.  The  old  distinction 
which  has  so  long  been  a  fundamental  assumption 
of  theology  between  the  supernatural,  with  its  ap- 
pendix of  miracle,  and  the  natural,  from  which  all 
miracle  is  eliminated,  is  whoUy  obsolete  so  far  as 
science  is  concerned,  and  theology  can  never  come 
into  real  harmony  with  scientific  methods  and 
results  until  it  has  equally  abolished  this  dualistic 
assumption.  Let  it  be  noted  that  science  has  to 
do  only  with  nature  and  its  laws.  What  may  lie 
behind  nature,  whence  its  laws  are  derived,  are 
questions  not  of  science  directly  but  of  philosophy. 
Monism  in  science,  therefore,  does  not  necessarily 
involve  monism  in  philosophy.  If  a  conflict  is  to 
arise  again  between  monism  and  dualism,  it  can- 
not be  fought  within  the  domain  of  nature  and 
natural  law,  but  in  the  metaphysical  or  transcen- 


350  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

dental  realm.  In  short,  a  man  may  be  a  dualist 
in  his  philosophy  and  yet  accept  wholly  the  mon- 
ism of  science.  When  Ernst  Haeckel,  in  "  The 
Riddle  of  the  Universe,"  declares  that  the  monism 
of  science  must  be  extended  to  all  philosophical 
problems,  he  passes  from  scientific  ground,  where 
he  is  strong  and  invulnerable,  to  philosophic 
ground,  where  he  at  once  becomes  weak,  and  shows 
only  too  painfully  "  the  heel  of  Achilles."  But 
the  new  problem  of  theology  in  the  aspect  under 
which  we  are  now  considering  it  is  directly  con- 
nected with  nature  and  its  laws.  Whatever  fur- 
ther problems  may  arise  in  the  field  of  philosophic 
thought,  the  problem  that  faces  the  theologian  of 
to-day  first  of  all  is  concerned  with  the  true  rela- 
tion of  religion  and  science ;  and  here  the  situation 
has  become  clear,  as  it  seems  to  me,  to  every  can- 
did observer.  The  new  theology  must  first  of  all 
be  a  scientific  theology  through  and  through. 
When  this  position  has  once  been  squarely  taken, 
it  will  be  found  that  scientific  and  critical  scholars 
who  have  been  treated  with  distrust  and  unfair- 
ness, and  even  sometimes  with  scant  courtesy,  as 
if  in  league  with  destroyers  of  the  faith,  are  really 
its  most  valuable  friends  and  helpers.  When  na- 
ture and  history  are  once  seen  to  be  "parts  of 
God's  ways,"  and  full  not  only  of  divine  ministries 
to  men,  but  also  of  the  truest  and  tenderest  reve- 
lations of  the  divine  character,  what  new  sources 
of  theological  truth  will  they  become !  Then  the 
Bible  will  become  a  new  book,  —  a  very  well  or 


THE  NEW  PROBLEM  OF  THEOLOGY   361 

natural  spring  of  the  water  of  life.  Above  all,  the 
teachings  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  will  glow  with  a 
new  spiritual  light  and  beauty,  drawn  as  they  were 
so  completely,  not  at  second  hand  from  human  lit- 
erature and  learning,  but  directly  from  God's  own 
great  book  of  nature  itself. 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  other  aspect  of  the  pro- 
blem. Assuming  that  science  and  religion  have 
been  brought  into  harmonious  union,  and  the 
highest  forms  of  human  intelligence  thus  made 
accordant  with  those  religious  instincts  and  princi- 
ples which  are  inextinguishably  rooted  in  every 
member  of  the  human  race,  we  are  ready  to  ask 
what  must  be  the  presiding  principle  of  a  theology 
which  shall  be  able  to  harmonize  the  hitherto 
divergent  religions  of  the  world  and  unite  all  their 
devotees  in  one  kingdom  of  truth  and  life  ?  One 
great  barrier  to  this  result  will  have  been  removed 
at  once  by  the  assumption  just  made.  The  full 
harmonization  of  religion  and  science  must  involve 
the  entire  downfall  of  the  old  traditional  credal 
theology,  on  which  the  great  missionary  move- 
ments of  Christendom  have  hitherto  largely  rested. 
With  the  spread  of  the  new  scientific  and  histor- 
ical light  the  same  result  must  follow  in  the  non- 
Christian  world,  involving  a  like  downfall  of  those 
religious  and  theological  cults  that  have  lived  on 
with  little  relaxation  of  their  hold  on  the  Ethnic 
peoples  from  prehistoric  tunes  to  the  present  day, 
and  have  resisted  hitherto  all  the  efforts  of  Chris- 
tian  missions.     We  have  seen  how  vain  it  is  to 


352  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

attempt  to  overthrow  the  speculative  dogmas  of  the 
Ethnic  religions  from  the  standpoint  of  Christian 
theology.  The  weapons  of  the  Ethnic  religious 
thinkers  are  as  keen  and  effective  as  those  of  their 
opponents.  The  history  of  religion  is  fuU  of  these 
metaphysical  battles ;  and  the  theological  ramparts 
behind  which  these  battles  were  fought  —  the 
most  amazing  metaphysical  structures  ever  reared 
by  man  —  are  to-day  the  wonder  and  admiration 
of  aU  students  of  ancient  philosophy.  But  they 
belong  to  a  mode  of  warfare  that  has  passed 
away.  To  carry  on  the  missionary  movement  on 
these  old  superannuated  lines  is  no  longer  pos- 
sible. The  new  missionary  gospel  must  be  one 
that  has  been  transformed  by  the  new  light  of  our 
age.  What  the  Ethnic  peoples  need,  first  of  all, 
is  the  spread  among  them  of  the  f  uUest  and  latest 
results  of  modern  scholarship.  God's  newest  reve- 
lations in  nature  and  history,  intelligently  under- 
stood and  accepted,  will  cause  those  ancient  sys- 
tems of  religious  speculation  which  are  strong 
against  any  form  of  Christian  dogma,  to  topple 
into  a  mass  of  ruins.  Error  and  superstition 
thrive  so  long  as  men  are  bound  in  the  chains  of 
ignorance  and  custom,  but  they  cannot  endure  the 
light  of  truth.  Education  and  enlightenment  is 
then  the  first  work  of  the  Christian  missionary.  But 
this  is  only  the  stepping-stone  to  his  real  mission 
as  a  religious  teacher.  When  science  has  done  its 
part,  then  historical  criticism  must  add  its  quota, 
if  he  would  be  completely  e(juipped  for  the  procla- 


THE  NEW  PROBLEM  OF  THEOLOGY   353 

mation  of  that  religious  truth  which  alone  has 
power  to  convert  and  sanctify  mankind.  Such 
truth  is  to  be  found  in  Christ's  original  and  un- 
adulterated gospel.  How  this  gospel  was  slowly- 
distorted  into  another  gospel  until  its  original 
lineaments  were  mostly  lost  for  long  ages,  and 
how  it  has  been  rediscovered  for  us  in  these  last 
times,  has  been  already  set  forth  at  length. 
Enough  here  to  summarize  and  say  that  histor- 
ical criticism  has  restored  to  Christian  faith  and 
love  the  true  historical  Jesus  of  Nazareth.  Layer 
after  layer  of  unhistorical  tradition  and  legend, 
with  its  superstitious  accretions  of  miracle  and 
fable,  have  been  removed,  until  at  last  the  veri- 
table picture  of  the  man  of  Galilee  in  all  the  ten- 
derness, and  sweetness,  and  moral  greatness  of  his 
hmnan  life  has  come  forth  to  view,  once  more  to 
draw  to  himself  all  tempted,  hungering,  and  thirst- 
ing human  hearts.  Such  a  picture,  with  all  its  gos- 
pel simplicity,  uttering  with  silent  and  yet  eloquent 
lips  that  parable  of  the  prodigal  son,  which  gath- 
ered up  into  itself  the  very  pith  and  marrow  of 
Christ's  moral  teaching,  has  more  power  and  vir- 
tue in  it  to  move  the  world  than  all  the  theologies 
from  Nice  to  Westminster.  Such  a  simple  gospel, 
without  dogma  or  credo^  without  any  mixture  of 
speculative  metaphysics,  —  a  gospel  from  God 
through  man  to  his  human  brother,  —  such  a  gos- 
pel of  divine-human  brotherly  love  the  heart  of 
man    everywhere    will    open    to  as  the    morning 


354  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

flowers  to  the  rising  sun,  and  it  will  open  to  no 
other,^ 

^  It  has  been  a  common  assumption  of  the  advocates  of  Chris- 
tian missions  that  the  Ethnic  religious  systems  have  little  hold 
upon  their  adherents.  A  close  study  of  the  history  of  these  sys- 
tems makes  clear  the  superficial  and  unhistorical  character  of  this 
assumption,  and  recent  events  are  proving  how  baseless  and  false 
it  is.  This  is  especially  the  case  with  the  g^eat  Asiatic  religions, 
such  as  Confucianism,  Hindooism,  Buddhism,  and  Mohammed- 
anism. As  I  write,  items  entirely  independent  of  each  other 
appearing  in  leading  newspapers  are  straws  that  indicate  much 
more  truthfully  than  missionary  reports  what  is  the  real  char- 
acter of  the  situation.  First,  the  Congregationalist  has  the  follow- 
ing in  its  editorial  columns:  ^^ Hinduism  Reviving.  Hindus  of 
the  educated  classes  in  Bengal  are  more  actively  engaged  in  sup- 
port of  their  religion  than  ever  before,  and  most  of  these  have 
been  educated  in  Christian  schools,  or  in  those  established  under 
the  auspices  of  the  British  government.  Societies  are  being 
formed  for  the  defense  of  Hinduism,  for  studying  its  literature, 
and  for  practical  religious  and  charitable  work.  Hindus  in  vari- 
ous ways  are  attempting  to  reform  Hinduism.  Some  denounce 
idolatry,  others  polytheism,  declaring  that  these  superstitions  are 
not  essential  to  their  faith."  The  Christian  Register  also  edi- 
torially remarks  :  "  The  vast  recuperative  powers  of  the  Oriental 
world  —  whether  Buddhist,  Mohammedan,  or  Confucian  —  have 
been  shown  through  innumerable  past  ages,  and  are  likely  to 
be  exhibited  within  our  times  upon  a  grand  scale."  The 
Boston  Transcript,  in  an  issue  of  the  same  week,  gives  some 
account  of  the  results  of  the  experiences  of  an  English  woman 
who  was  led  by  "  her  interest  in  the  Hindoo  religion  and  people 
to  go  to  India  to. study  Hindooism  on  its  own  ground."  She  spent 
nine  years,  "  living  entirely  among  the  natives."  On  the  point 
with  which  I  am  now  concerned  Miss  Muller  ' '  thinks  it  improb- 
able that  Christianity  can  get  any  general  hold  on  the  Hindoos 
for  a  very  long  time  to  come,  if  ever."  These  items  are  in  line 
with  other  recent  testimony  of  men  who  have  lived  many  years 
in  India  and  have  looked  at  the  matter  with  unprejudiced  minds. 

What  is  thus  made  evident  by  the  testimony  of  recent  obser- 
vation is  amply  sustained  by  the  history  of  the  Ethnic  religions, 
which  shows  that  the  essential  dogmas  of  those  religfions  have 
been  slowly  built  up  on  primary  religious  ideas  that  form  the 


THE  NEW  PROBLEM  OF  THEOLOGY   355 

At  this  point  I  cannot  help  noting  how  simple 
at   last   "the  new  problem   of   theology   in    the 

very  warp  and  woof  of  the  Ethnic  religions  consciousness,  and 
cannot  be  dislodged  by  another  set  of  ideas  without  an  upheaval 
such  as  is  not  likely  to  happen  at  present.  Such  changes  are  of 
all  the  slowest  in  their  movement.  There  is  something  deeper 
and  more  radical  in  human  nature  and  society  than  mere  dogma 
or  dogmatic  systems  of  religious  belief.  These  are  but  the  out- 
growth of  sentiments  and  ideas  that  have  their  roots  in  the  pri- 
mary moral  instincts  and  tendencies  of  human  nature.  While  it 
is  true  that  the  human  race  is  generically  one,  it  is  equally  true 
that  different  varieties  of  mankind  have  developed  great  diver- 
gencies of  religious  sentiment  and  thought,  such  as  ideas  of  the 
family,  of  woman,  of  government,  of  society,  of  racial  kinship ; 
and  the  more  closely  these  subjects  are  studied,  the  more  clearly 
will  it  be  seen  that  religious  dogmatic  systems  are  secondary  to 
these  primary  ideas,  and  are  built  up  to  support  them.  Here,  in 
part  at  least,  is  the  explanation  of  the  remarkable  and  appar- 
ently deep-seated  difference  between  the  Asiatic  Oriental  mind 
and  character  and  that  of  the  Occidental  or  European.  This 
difference  lies  below  the  dogmatic  differences  between  the 
Ethnic  and  Christian  religions,  and  it  is  the  chief  bar  to  the  suc- 
cess of  Christian  missions.  It  may  be  said  that  Christianity  is 
itself  of  Asiatic  origin.  This  is  true,  but  its  speedy  amalgama- 
tion with  Greek  ideas  completely  changed  its  whole  character, 
as  has  been  shown.  A  Semitic  Asiatic  religion  became  a  Hellen- 
ized  European  religion,  and  it  has  remained  such  to  this  day. 
The  Semitic  Judaism  out  of  which  it  sprang  has  always  refused 
to  accept  it.  This  is  the  historical  reason  why  Christianity  in  its 
early  progress  never  penetrated  far  beyond  the  outskirts  of  the 
Roman  Empire.  The  subsequent  conversion  of  the  western  bar- 
barians was  more  due  to  the  influence  of  Roman  civilization  and 
culture,  in  connection  with  race  affinity,  than  to  the  dogmas  of 
the  Christian  religion.  Thus  it  may  be  seen  that  the  problem 
of  the  Christianization  of  the  world  is  a  far  more  complex  and 
intricate  one  than  is  ordinarily  supposed.  It  is  my  profound 
conviction,  as  a  historical  student,  that  the  Christian  nations 
providentially  hold  the  keys  of  the  world's  religious  as  well  as 
political  future ;  but  everything  depends,  as  I  have  endeavored 
to  show,  on  the  way  in  which  Christianity  employs  its  forces. 


356  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

twentieth  century  "  has  become.  In  this  volume 
we  have  walked  around  and  closely  scanned  grand 
scholastic  metaphysical  systems,  the  Hindoo,  the 
Plotinian,  the  Christian,  rising  toward  the  sky 
like  the  vast  mediaeval  cathedrals ;  but  even  now 
they  are  growing  dim  in  the  distance  behind  us, 
as  we  turn  the  corner  of  a  new  century,  while  be- 
fore us  rises  the  unobtrusive  figure  of  a  man,  the 
meek  and  lowly  Jesus,  who  "  had  not  where  to 
lay  his  head."  Humbling,  indeed,  is  such  a  shrink- 
age of  human  philosophy  to  human  pride.  Not 
so  strange  would  it  be  if  again,  as  in  the  begin- 
nings of  Christianity,  Christ  in  his  lowliness 
should  be  "  despised  and  rejected  "  even  by  the 
religious  leaders  of  Christendom,  unwilling  to 
leave  those  mediaeval  structures  on  which  they 
have  labored  so  long  for  the  humble  abode  of 
Nazareth.  Fortunate  the  Christian  missionary 
who  shall  have  so  caught  the  spirit  of  his  master 
that  he  will  be  ready  to  lay  aside  all  the  pride  of 
human  philosophy,  as  Paul  did,  and  preach  "  Jesus 
Christ  and  him  crucified,"  that  is,  Christ's  own 
gospel  of  love  and  sacrifice. 

The  new  problem  of  theology  once  fairly 
grasped,  the  construction  will  be  easy.  I  had  al- 
most said  that  it  wiU  construct  itself.     Founded 

No  earnest  student  of  the  great  Oriental  religions  can,  in  my 
judgment,  be  made  to  believe  that  they  will  ever  be  overthi-own 
by  philosophical  or  theological  dogmas  of  any  kind.  But,  as  I 
have  said,  there  is  a  more  excellent  way,  and  it  is  the  only  way, 
—  the  way  of  a  nobler  civilization,  a  truer  science,  a  diviner  gos- 
pel of  love  and  charity. 


THE  NEW  PROBLEM  OF  THEOLOGY   357 

on  the  inductive  method,  its  development  will  be 
natural  and  spontaneous.  As  science  and  histor- 
ical criticism  move  on  to  new  fields  of  discovery 
and  knowledge,  theology  wiU  follow,  appropriat- 
ing all  the  new  truth  for  the  satisfaction  of  its 
intellectual  and  spiritual  needs.  As  "  knowledge 
grows  from  more  to  more,"  religion  and  the  re- 
ligious nature  will  rise  to  higher  and  fuller  con- 
ceptions of  truth. 

It  is  not  difficult  also  to  forecast  what  the  essen- 
tial feature  of  the  new  theology  will  be.  Man  and 
nature  together  will  constitute  its  fundamental 
material,  and  as  man  is  nature's  crown,  he  wiU 
naturally  be  the  foremost  subject  of  rehgious  in- 
terest. Besides,  man's  own  moral  consciousness  is 
the  focus-point  through  which  all  the  moral  light 
of  the  universe  in  every  form  of  revelation  must 
pass.  The  seat  of  moral  authority  for  every  man 
is  in  his  own  moral  nature.  It  becomes,  therefore, 
the  highest  moral  duty  of  every  man  to  study  him- 
seK,  and  in  the  light  of  that  psychological  survey 
to  test  and  gauge  his  moral  responsibility.  All 
the  spiritual  knowledge  of  which  man  is  capable 
must  reach  him  through  his  own  moral  faculties, 
so  that  its  real  character  will  be  truly  discoverable 
only  as  it  takes  on  the  forms  of  the  moral  con- 
sciousness. God  can  be  known  only  as  his  image 
is  shadowed  in  man's  own  moral  nature.  Whether 
God  and  man  are  of  one  common  image  and  like- 
ness or  not,  man  cannot  help  conceiving  of  God  in 
that  way.     If  God  is  not  a  moral  and  personal 


368  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

being,  he  is  to  man  "  an  unknown  God."  Hence 
theology  is  destined  to  be  essentially  an  anthropo- 
logy ;  and  psychology  or  the  study  of  man's  higher 
nature  will  form  with  natural  science  the  twin 
"  master  lights  "  of  theological  truth,  —  historical 
criticism  assisting  them  by  its  methods  of  elimi- 
nating possible  error  and  by  shedding  the  further 
light  of  universal  human  experience  upon  man's 
individual  path. 

Another  historical  forecast  may  also  be  taken. 
Not  only  wiU  the  development  of  the  new  theology 
be  easy,  it  will  also  be  rapid.  Historical  move- 
ments as  a  rule  are  slow ;  but  crises  often  involve 
immense  changes  that  are  accomplished  with  a 
marvelous  celerity.  Such,  I  believe,  will  be  the 
case  in  the  religious  and  theological  advances  of 
the  new  century.  Even  now  one  can  feel  the 
rushing  of  the  tide  beneath  his  feet.  Cause  and 
effect  go  together.  One  has  only  to  study  the 
causes  of  the  present  religious  and  theological 
unrest,  and  see  how  deep  and  radical  they  are,  to 
lose  all  sense  of  surprise  at  the  great  changes  that 
are  coming  over  human  thought  and  especially 
over  all  the  old  forms  of  religious  belief.  This 
movement  is  still  in  its  very  birth  throes.  The 
new  currents  are  only  just  beginning  to  set  toward 
their  swift  forward  march.  Science  is  still  "  mew- 
ing its  mighty  youth,"  and  historical  criticism  is 
but  a  child  in  swaddling  clothes.  What  vast  ac- 
cessions to  the  realm  of  knowledge  may  we  not 
expect  when  these  striplings  attain  to  their  full 


THE  NEW  PROBLEM  OF  THEOLOGY  359 

majority !  The  infant  is  already  born,  so  the 
historical  observer  may  not  fear  to  say,  who  will 
see  with  his  own  eyes  an  era  of  scientific  and  his- 
torical progress  that  shall  make  our  present 
achievements  seem  hke  the  play  of  children; 
and  with  it  a  new  philosophy  of  nature,  of  man, 
and  of  God,  —  in  brief,  a  new  world,  a  new  re- 
ligion, and  a  new  theology  practically  complete. 

But  some  one  metaphysically  inclined,  and  not 
quite  ready  to  accept  such  a  simple  solution  as  the 
inductive  historical  method  offers,  may  skeptically 
raise  the  question :  what  about  monism  versus 
dualism  f  To  which  my  reply  would  be :  For 
such  a  riddle  I  have  no  answer.  Ask,  if  you 
will,  the  sphinxes  that  line  the  approach  to  the 
ruined  temple  of  Egyptian  Karnak,  whose  speech- 
less lips  and  far-off  looking  eyes  are  silent  wit- 
nesses to  the  eternal  mystery  of  life  and  time. 
For  myseK,  I  have  little  faith  in  metaphysical 
speculation  as  containing  any  satisfactory  solution 
of  religious  problems  or  even  as  able  to  throw  any 
practical  light  upon  them.  Not  till  Kant  had 
passed  from  the  barren  wastes  of  speculative  ra- 
tionalistic criticism  to  the  green  pastures  of  man's 
moral  intuitions  did  his  religious  consciousness 
find  rest.  "  The  true  fight  that  enlighteneth 
every  man  that  cometh  into  the  world "  was 
kindled  by  God  in  every  man's  moral  nature. 
By  itseK  the  speculative  or  ratiocinating  faculty, 
whether  analytical  or  synthetical,  is  but  a  dry 
Sahara  waste.    It  has  no  fountain  of  spiritual  life. 


360  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

Man's  moral  consciousness  is  the  natural  head- 
spring of  all  religion  and  of  aU  religious  truth. 
That  consciousness  can  be  interrogated  and  studied 
only  by  the  inductive  or  experimental  method. 
Therefore  scientific  and  historical  induction  affords 
the  only  basis  of  a  true  theology.  It  has  been  made 
a  point  of  criticism  against  "The  Evolution  of 
Trinitarism  "  that  it  declares  the  moral  conscious- 
ness to  be  in  its  very  nature  theistic,  —  it  being 
assimied  by  these  critics  that  such  a  declaration  is 
a  priori  or  deductive  rather  than  inductive.  Such 
an  assumption  I  decline  to  accept,  and  assert,  on 
the  contrary,  that  aU  the  religious  light  we  have 
from  our  moral  consciousness  is  purely  the  result  of 
experience,  and  that  such  experience  can  be  studied 
only  by  experimental  induction  ;  and  further,  that 
the  widest  possible  survey  of  the  moral  history  of 
mankind  proves  conclusively  that  man's  moral  in- 
stincts and  intuitions  are  theistic,  and  not  pan- 
theistic. If  my  position  be  valid,  the  charge  of 
logical  inconsistency  falls  to  the  ground. 

Let  me  here  say  that  the  difference  between 
these  two  modes  of  procedure  in  the  discovery  of 
religious  truth  is  vital.  The  true  fons  et  origo  of 
the  a  priori  or  abstract  method,  with  all  its  meta- 
physical assumptions,  is  the  speculative  faculty,  — 
a  method  of  religious  quest  and  adventure  as  un- 
safe as  Bellerophon's  horse  Pegasus,  who  threw  his 
rider  to  the  earth  when  he  wished  to  be  carried  to 
heaven.  This  faculty  has  its  function  in  critical 
philosophy,  but  it  should  be  a  servant,  and  never 


THE  NEW  PROBLEM  OF  THEOLOGY  361 

become  a  master.  If  one  would  realize  what 
mastership  involves,  he  has  only  to  read  the  his- 
tory of  Christian  theology.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  true  and  original  home  of  religion  and  of  re- 
ligious truth  is  man's  religious  nature.  Strange 
that  so  easy  a  lesson  should  be  so  hard  to  remem- 
ber. No  doubt  the  world  will  have  its  a  priori' s 
and  speculative  idealisms  to  the  end  of  time. 
There  are  always  some  to  whom  a  veritable  ab- 
straction or  Platonic  "  idea  "  is  "  daily  food." 
Unfortunately  for  such  the  twentieth  century  is 
otherwise  inclined.  The  Zeitgeist  has  worked 
too  hard  to  get  rid  of  the  metaphysical  cobwebs 
of  past  millenniums  and  to  set  its  house  in  order 
for  the  new  facts  of  science  and  history,  to  listen 
credulously  or  patiently  to  any  metaphysical  siren 
song.  The  new  theology,  whatever  else  it  may 
be,  will  be  a  matter  offact^  a  moral,  an  anthro- 
pologic  theology,  and  will  be  solidly  built  on  the 
foundation  stones  of  the  truths  revealed  through 
man's  moral  consciousness.  Here  will  be  the  field 
of  investigation,  —  a  field  of  religious  inquiry 
virgin  and  rich  indeed,  hitherto  almost  covered 
up  by  the  old  theological  dogmas  of  "original 
sin"  and  "total  depravity."  How  could  Jona- 
than Edwards  understand  the  religious  nature  of  a 
child,  when  he  piously  believed  that  from  birth 
it  was  "a  little  viper"  steeped  in  the  "poison" 
of  sin !  Were  I  asked  what  religious  book  I  re- 
gard as  the  most  epochal  of  the  last  century  in 
New  England  or  even  in  America  I  should  answer 


362  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

at  once :  BushneU's  "  Christian  Nui-ture."  This 
book,  first  published  in  1860, — the  year  following, 
be  it  noted,  the  publication  of  Darwin's  "  Origin  of 
Species,"  —  has  exerted  a  quiet  but  truly  remark- 
able influence.  If  ever  a  man  "builded  better 
than  he  knew,"  it  was  Bushnell.  Scarcely  realiz- 
ing what  he  was  doing,  BushneU  practically  laid 
the  first  stone  in  the  foundations  of  the  new 
theology.  That  stone  was  the  new  position  taken 
that  the  Christian  religion  is  a  matter  of  natural 
growth  and  nurture  in  man,  beginning  with  the 
earliest  years  of  childhood.  The  whole  book  is  a 
fervid  plea  for  the  careful  Christian  education  and 
training  of  children  from  the  beginnings  of  moral 
existence.  When  it  was  published,  the  times  were 
ripe  for  the  seed  sown.  The  Edwardsian  Calvin- 
istic  doctrine  of  child-nature  as  poisoned  and  de- 
praved by  the  Adamic  sin  was  losing  its  hold  on 
the  age,  partly  through  the  prevalence  of  Hopkin- 
sianism  which  denied  natural  corruption,  though 
putting  something  just  as  bad  in  its  place,  but 
more  through  the  scientific  and  critical  light  that 
was  slowly  permeating  the  minds  of  men.  To 
this  day  I  know  of  no  theological  work  so  fuU  of 
the  new  religious  leaven  and  spirit  that  are  work- 
ing in  our  time  as  BushneU's  ''  Christian  Nurture ; " 
and  its  main  teaching  concerning  the  child-nature 
will,  I  believe,  be  the  most  fruitful  feature  of 
those  psychological  investigations  which  more  than 
aU  other  influences  combined  will  give  a  new  shap- 
ing to   theological   thought.     The   new  theology 


THE  NEW  PROBLEM  OF  THEOLOGY  363 

will   not   only  be   anthropological :    it  will   be  a 
child-anthropology^  and  Milton's  lines  — 

"  The  childhood  shows  the  man 
As  morning  shows  the  day  "  — 

will  be  the  first  article  of  its  credo. 

Realizing  thus  how  simple  and  rapid  the  theo-' 
logical  movement  of  the  twentieth  century  is  likely 
to  be,  I  am  ready  to  believe  that  the  necessary 
preliminary  work  of  destructive  criticism  may  soon 
give  way  to  a  new  theological  construction.  It  is 
true  that  theological  changes  are  usually  of  creep- 
ing pace,  especially  when  thought  has  become 
stiffened  into  creeds.  Who  does  not  realize  it 
that  has  studied  the  history  of  theological  beliefs  ? 
How  often  does  the  Scripture  adage  come  to 
mind,  with  ever  growing  impressiveness,  "  One 
day  with  the  Lord  is  as  a  thousand  years  "  !  The 
movement  of  the  dogmatic  evolutions  of  the  great 
world  religions  has  been  like  the  geological  forma- 
tion of  the  crust  of  the  earth.  The  Ethnic  trini- 
ties antedate  all  history,  and  one  may  follow  them 
until  they  are  lost  in  the  prehistoric  origins  of  the 
race.  Through  what  long  ages  may  the  growth 
of  Christian  theology  be  traced !  As  a  rule  how 
unyielding  and  tenacious  of  its  hold  on  Christian 
faith  has  every  dogma  been  !  Yet,  on  the  other 
hand,  it  has  been  proved  equally  true  that  "a 
thousand  years  with  the  Lord  are  as  one  day." 
Long  deferred  was  the  great  Protestant  Eeforma- 
tion  that  broke  for  half  of  Europe  the  papal  yoke ; 
but  when  the  crisis  at  last  came,  a  single  genera- 


364  THE  ETHNIC  TRINITIES 

tion  sufficed  to  accomplish  the  most  remarkable 
ecclesiastical  revolt  in  history.  The  signs  of  an 
equally  remarkable  theological  revolution  fiU  the 
religious  sky  to-day  and  give  no  uncertain  note  of 
warning  that  "  The  time  is  short,^^ 

I  cannot  finish  this  book  without  touching  once 
more  the  note  which  was  struck  in  the  last  chapter 
of  my  previous  volume.  If  the  historical  evolution 
of  nineteen  centuries  gave  grounds  for  optimistic 
hopefulness,  how  much  more  occasion  for  a  like 
sentiment  at  the  conclusion  of  a  survey  of  man's  re- 
ligious history  from  the  beginning  of  time !  How 
infinitely  great  the  contrast  between  the  moral 
ignorance  and  blindness  of  mankind  at  the  outset 
of  their  moral  life  and  our  clear  and  intelligent 
grasp  of  religious  truth  to-day !  What  makes  this 
contrast  the  more  signal  is  the  fact  that  in  our  own 
generation  not  only  has  the  true  history  of  nature 
and  man  been  made  known,  but  also  the  scientific 
and  historical  laws  in  accordance  with  which  it  is 
guided  and  will  continue  to  be  guided  in  the 
future.  Here  the  basis  is  laid  as  it  was  never  laid 
before  for  confidence  and  faith.  To  a  degree  at 
least  we  now  know  where  we  are  in  God's  universe 
and  whither  we  are  tending.  "  God  hath  spoken 
to  us  at  the  end  of  these  days,"  by  the  things  that 
are  made,  in  a  manner  that  cannot  be  mistaken, 
and  shown  that  "  he  is  not  far  from  any  one  of 
us."  Nature,  as  its  laws  have  proved,  is  good,  not 
evil,  and  the  God  of  nature  must  be  good  also. 
Divine  revelation,  to  earlier  faith  so  mysterious, 


THE  NEW  PROBLEM  OF  THEOLOGY   365 

transcendent,  and  sporadic,  has  become  natural  and 
immanent  and  harmonious  with  the  faculties  of 
our  moral  nature.  We  wait  no  longer  to  hear 
God  speak  outside  of  us  in  some  miraculous  way, 
but  listen  contiaually  to  "  the  still  small  voice  " 
that  whispers  within  our  own  souls.  With  the 
new  light  of  our  scientific  day  the  old  materialism, 
with  all  its  degrading  and  cruel  superstitions,  has 
faded  into  shadows  that  have  gone  with  the  night. 
Religion  with  us  is  no  longer  of  the  letter  or  of 
the  form,  but  of  the  spirit.  Dogma  is  but  the 
cast-off  badge  of  a  slavery  that  has  given  place  to 
"  the  freedom  wherewith  Christ  hath  made  us 
free."  Even  those  fads  of  religious  fancy  and 
custom  that  human  nature  delights  in  at  certain 
stages  and  in  certain  moods  are  dropping  off  as 
"  childish  things."  The  educated  world  has  at 
last  entered  into  the  inheritance  of  its  full  man- 
hood. As  it  looks  backward  it  sees  the  difficult 
and  uncertain  path  by  which  it  has  slowly  gained 
its  present  point  of  vision,  and  turning  to  the 
future  rejoices  in  that  eternal  sweep  of  unchang- 
ing divine  law  which  gives  such  sweet  assurance 
that  all  things  shall  continue  "  as  they  were  from 
the  beginning,"  only  revealing  themselves  more 
and  more  clearly  in  all  their  rhythmic  order  and 
grace,  — 

"  Forever  singing  as  they  shine, 
The  hand  that  made  us  is  divine." 

Coming  back  from  such  an  outlook  to  the  little 
round  of  our  mortal  lives,  with  their  vicissitudes  of 


366  THE  ETHNIC   TRINITIES 

sorrow  and  joy,  loss  and  gain,  good  and  evil,  how 
can  we  forget  the  truth  thus  learned,  that  the  whole 
universe  in  which  we  live,  with  all  its  laws  and 
forces  and  historical  evolutions,  declares  in  one  ma- 
jestic and  harmonious  accord  that  "  God  is  good  "? 
It  was  with  a  vision  not  quite  cleared  from  the 
clouds  of  old  tradition,  but  with  eager  gaze  into  the 
growing  revelations  which  nature  and  history  had 
already  disclosed,  that  Tennyson  summed  up  in  his 
"  In  Memoriam  "  the  half  doubting,  half  believing 
attitude  of  the  century  just  ended  :  — 

"  Oh  yet  we  trust  that  somehow  good 
Will  be  the  final  goal  of  ill, 
To  pangs  of  nature,  sins  of  will, 
Defects  of  doubt,  and  taints  of  blood ; 

"  That  nothing  walks  with  aimless  feet ; 
That  not  one  life  shall  be  destroyed, 
Or  cast  as  rubbish  to  the  void. 
When  God  hath  made  the  pile  complete. 

"  Behold,  we  know  not  anything ; 

I  can  but  trust  that  good  shall  fall 
At  last  —  far  oflE  —  at  last,  to  all. 
And  every  winter  change  to  spring. 

"So  runs  my  dream  :  but  what  am  I  ? 
An  infant  crying  in  the  night : 
An  infant  crying  for  the  light : 
And  with  no  language  but  a  cry." 

Such  a  strain,  with  all  its  longing  after  faith, 
and  with  its  frank  confession  of  agnosticism  and 
doubt,  reminds  one  of  the  melancholy  notes  of 
Virgil's  ^neid.  Tennyson's  "  trust  "  after  all  is 
but  a  "  dream,"  and  his  expression  of  it  but  an 


THE  NEW  PROBLEM  OF  THEOLOGY   367 

"  infant's  cry."  It  is  "  night  "  still  around  him. 
"  The  light,"  for  which  he  prays  has  not  yet  risen.^ 
I  can  but  think  that  the  future  Tennyson  or 
Virgil  of  our  twentieth  century  will  strike  a  more 
hopeful  key  and  sing  a  nobler  song.  Browning 
was  only  a  younger  contemporary  of  Tennyson, 
but  he  had  caught  something  of  the  spirit  of  the 
coming  age  when  he  wrote  that  simple  yet  weird 
poem,  "  The  Boy  and  the  Angel,"  from  which  I 
quote  :  — 

"  Morning,  evening,  noon  and  night, 
*  Praise  God  !  '  sang  Theocrite. 

"  Hard  he  labored,  long  and  well ; 
O'er  his  work  the  boy's  curls  f  elL 

"  But  ever,  at  each  period, 
He  stopped  and  sang,  '  Praise  God  !  ' 

"  Then  back  again  his  curls  he  threw, 
And  cheerful  turned  to  work  anew. 

"  He  did  God's  will ;  to  him,  all  one 
If  on  the  earth  or  in  the  sun. 

^  It  may  be  said  that  the  "  In  Memoriam  "  does  not  fairly 
represent  Tennyson's  maturer  religious  views.  Allowing  this,  it 
remains  true  that  this  poem,  with  all  its  agnostic  and  hesitating 
religious  temper,  accurately  represents  the  ruling  literary  spirit  of 
the  nineteenth  century  ;  and  it  may  be  added  that  the  "  In  Me- 
moriam "  influenced  religiously  the  age  more  than  all  Tennyson's 
other  writings.  Nor  does  it  stand  alone  among  these  writings  in 
its  religious  character.  The  same  note  of  doubt,  uncertainty,  and 
unrest  is  even  more  strongly  struck  in  "  The  Two  Voices."  No 
doubt,  as  Teimyson  drew  nearer  to  the  end  of  the  century,  the 
spirit  of  unquestioning  faith  grew  on  him,  and  there  are  clear 
touches  of  it  in  some  of  his  last  poems.  But  if  the  "  In  Memo- 
riam "  was  the  supreme  poetical  creation  of  the  Victorian  age,  no 
less  was  it  the  supreme  expression  of  its  religious  moods. 


368  THE  ETHNIC   TRINITIES 

"  God  said,  *  A  praise  is  in  mine  ear ; 
There  is  no  doubt  in  it,  no  fear ! '  " 

Who  does  not  note  the  difference  in  the  religious 
temper  of  these  two  poets  ?  The  "  In  Memoriam  " 
is  pensive  with  a  minor  strain  of  baffled  moral 
effort  and  anxious  uncertainty  that  vibrates  all 
through  the  poem  like  a  chilling  east  wind.  But 
Browning  has  somehow  seen  a  new  light  —  the 
light  of  a  new  scientific  and  historical  day. 

"  God  said, '  A  praise  is  in  mine  ear ; 
There  is  no  doubt  in  it,  no  fear  !  '  " 

will  be  the  deep  undertone  and  refrain  of  man's 
coming  religion,  —  not  so  much  a  new  religion  as 
a  revival  of  Christ's  own  religion,  simple,  spiritual, 
filled  with  a  sense  of  God's  presence  and  reflecting 
his  gracious  spirit  of  love.  This  new  age  of  ours 
is  the  heir  of  two  centuries.  The  eighteenth  cen- 
tury was  marked  by  an  intense  skeptical  reaction 
from  a  theology  of  gloom  and  fear.  The  nine- 
teenth century  was  an  age  of  conflict  between  tra- 
ditional dogmas  that  were  embalmed  in  creeds  and 
the  moral  awakening  caused  by  the  new  revelations 
of  science  and  history.  The  twentieth  century  will 
be  an  era  of  faith  built  on  solid  grounds,  and  of 
religious  freedom  and  peace. 

Into  that  new  era  our  survey  cannot  further 
carry  us.  The  scroU  of  God's  providence  unrolls 
only  as  time  moves  on.  But  this  we  knoW,  that 
faith,  freedom,  and  peace  are  always  the  harbingers 
of  the  highest  blessings  to  man,  and  of  the  fullest 
revelations  of  God.     Political  peace,  with  its  ac- 


THE  NEW  PROBLEM  OF  THEOLOGY  369 

companiment  of  freedom,  has  ever  been  the  world's 
ideal.  Men  have  fought,  bled,  and  died  for  it. 
"Ense  petit  placidam  sub  libertate  quietem"  is 
still  written  on  the  escutcheon  of  the  State  of 
Massachusetts,  and  fitly  symbolizes  the  Puritan 
spirit.  But  political  peace  is  only  a  crude  pre- 
figurement  of  moral  and  spiritual  peace  and  har- 
mony. Towards  this  the  noblest  souls  of  the  race 
have  always  striven.  "Peace  I  leave  with  you" 
was  Christ's  last  message  to  his  sorrowing  com- 
panions. It  is  in  such  an  atmosphere  that  man 
receives  the  clearest  and  purest  inspirations.  Only 
after  the  storm  on  the  Gralilean  lake  had  subsided, 
and  the  tumult  in  the  hearts  of  Christ's  disciples 
had  been  stilled,  did  they  gain  a  new  apprehension 
of  his  marvelous  nature  and  exclaim :  "  What 
manner  of  man  is  this  ?  "  Not  in  times  of  "  Sturm 
und  Drang "  are  the  highest  heavens  opened. 
Wordsworth  had  caught  the  true  secret  of  the 
"  open  vision  "  in  the  strangely  mystical  lines :  — 

"  Hence  in  a  season  of  calm  weather 
Though  inland  far  we  be, 
Our  souls  have  sight  of  that  immortal  sea 
Which  brought  us  hither, 
Can  in  a  moment  travel  thither, 
And  see  the  children  sport  upon  the  shore, 
And  hear  the  mighty  waters  rolling  evermore." 


INDEX 


Abbott,  Ltman,  criticism  of  "  Evolu- 
tion of  Trinitarianism,"  213;  ob- 
jects to  my  view  of  Paul's  media- 
tional  theology,  213;  declares  that 
I  make  Paul  an  Arian,  213;  real 
point  of  objection  to  my  interpreta- 
tion, 215 ;  his  dislike  of  the  media- 
tion doctrine,  216;  thinks  I  mis- 
imderstand  Paul,  216;  my  view  of 
evolution  of  Trinitarianism  "  fatally 
defective,"  218;  "  fatal  ^defect  "  of 
Dr.  Abbott's  whole  criticism,  218  ; 
admits  the  laws  of  natiire  to  be  in- 
violable with  a  single  exception,  347. 

*•  American  Journal  of  Theology," 
article,  183. 

Amiel,  H.  F.,  quoted,  199. 

Apostles'  Creed,  title  legendary,  232  ; 
not  earlier  in  original  form  than 
third  century,  233 ;  reached  its  pre- 
sent shape  in  eighth  century  as  a 
Latin  creed  of  Western  Church,  235. 

Aristotle,  passage  from  De  Calo,  16  ; 
not  a  trinitarian,  18 ;  threefold  law 
of  the  syllogism,  18 ;  Nicomachean 
Ethics,  309  ;  corrected  ethical  vacil- 
lation of  Plato,  310. 

Athenagoras  held  Holy  Spirit  to  be  an 
effluence  (not  personal)  from  Gk)d, 
241. 

Athene,  mediator  between  gods  and 
men,  108  ;  central  figure  of  Odyssey, 
108;  analysis  of  action  of  Odys- 
sey, 108  ;  various  incarnations,  109  ; 
intercessor  for  men,  108;  mediat- 
ing character,  110  ;  "  in  fashion 
as  a  man,"  112;  motherly  char- 
acter, 113;  compared  with  Mary, 
mother  of  Jesus,  114;  "called  vir- 
gin," 114. 

Augustine,  use  of  tripartite  character 
of  soul  in  work  on  Trinity,  18; 
Contra  Mendacium,  312. 


Babylonian  epic  of  creation,  221. 

Bacon,  B.  W.,  article  in  "  Biblical 
World,"  218 ;  on  the  Fourth  Gospel, 
quoted,  263. 

Baptism,  originally  "into  Christ," 
230  ;  evolution  of  trinitarian  for- 
mula, 231,  232. 

Barnabas,  epistle  of,  228. 

Bertrand,  A.,  La  Religion  des  Gau- 
lois,  102,  note. 

Bhagavatgita  {Divine  Song),  54,  123. 

Brahm,  absolute  form  of  personal 
Brahma,  43. 

Browning,  R.,  "  The  Boy  and  the  An- 
gel," quoted,  367  ;  compared  with 
Tennyson,  368. 

Buddha  (Gautama),  39  ;  character  of 
teaching,  40;  collection  of  reputed 
sayings,  40;  comparison  with 
Christ's  sayings,  41 ;  lives  of  B. 
mostly  legendary  ;  likeness  to  gos- 
pel accounts  of  Christ,  42 ;  tempta- 
tion by  the  Evil  One,  42;  relation 
of  Buddhist  and  Christian  tradi- 
tions, 42  ;  B.  in  later  Hindoo  tradi- 
tion an  incarnation  of  Vishnu. 

Buddhism,  39 ;  not  a  dogmatic  revolt 
from  earlier  Hindoo  ideas,  57 ;  its 
dogma  of  an  incarnation  of  Gk>d  the 
only  historical  counterpart  to  that 
of  Christianity,  58 ;  tolerant  charac- 
ter, 275. 

Bushnell,  H.,  "Christian  Nurture," 
most  epochal  book  of  last  century  in 
America,  362;  doctrine  of  child 
nurture  fruitful  in  psychological 
investigations,  362. 

Capttolinb  temple,  118. 

Carey,  Professor,  "  Synoptic  Gos- 
pels," quoted,  223. 

Christian  angelology  and  demonology, 
276;    radically   similar    to  Ethnic 


372 


INDEX 


ideas,  276;  essentially  polytheistic 
in  Middle  Ages,  278. 

"Christian  Register,"  quoted,  354, 
note. 

Christian  religion,  no  more  "histori- 
cal "  than  Ethnic  religions,  194, 
197  ;  comes  under  the  strict  law  of 
historical  evolution,  198  ;  traditional 
view  of,  as  the  one  divine  gospel, 
199 ;  entrance  into  Greek  world  be- 
gins a  new  chapter  of  history,  210 ; 
its  philosophy  radically  changed, 
211 ;  Paul  and  early  Fathers  influ- 
enced by  Greek  thought,  211 ;  close 
historical  connection  between  Chris- 
tian and  Ethnic  religions,  212;  in- 
tolerant as  compared  with  Ethnic 
religions,  275. 

Christian  theology  essentially  a  Chris- 
tology,  220. 

Christianity,  as  a  world-religion,  281; 
religion  and  the  religious  instinct 
in  men  essentially  one,  282;  God, 
one,  282 ;  world-religion  finally  one, 
283;  not  an  external  vmity,  283; 
creeds  and  dogmas  barriers  to  unity, 
283 ;  comparative  ineffectualness  of 
Christian  missions,  285;  necessity 
of  revival  of  Christ's  original  gospel, 
286  ;  its  ruling  force,  286  ;  crisis  in 
history  of,  291 ;  how  made  ready 
for  its  work,  293 ;  causes  of  unreadi- 
ness, 293 ;  gradual  shifting  of  reli- 
gious leadership,  297 ;  exposed  to 
dangers  within  and  without,  298; 
as  organized,  exposed  to  two  perils, 
298 ;  churches  wedded  to  forms  of 
religious  truth  out  of  joint  with  our 
times,  301 ;  campaign  of  education 
imperatively  needed,  302;  proper 
teaching  of  the  young,  302;  false 
reliance  on  perpetuity  of  organized 
chiurch,  303 ;  no  institution  can  live 
simply  on  its  past,  305;  peculiar 
character  of  religious  insincerity, 
306 ;  sincerity  of  Christ,  306 ;  ethics 
of  Plato  and  Aristotle,  307 ;  influ- 
ence on  church,  309 ;  "  officiosum 
mendacium,^^  309;  Old  Testament 
ethical  teaching,  310 ;  effect  on  eth- 
ics of  the  theory  of  "  double  sense  " 
in  Scripture,  311 ;  lawful  use  of  dis- 
simulation against  heretics,  311 ; 
Augustine's  "  contra  mendacium,^^ 


312;  ethics  of  "offlciosum  menda- 
cium^^  continued  after  Protestant 
revolt,  314 ;  inherited  virus  of  in- 
sincerity in  the  church  to-day,  315  ; 
Aristotle  on  dissimulation,  319; 
sin  of  suppressio  veri,  320 ;  modem 
Biblical  exegesis,  320  ;  "  I  go  not  up 
to  this  feast,"  321 ;  change  of  ovk 
to  ovwoi,  321 ;  Jerome,  quoted,  321  ; 
charges  of  Porphyry,  322  ;  Jerome's 
defense,  322 ;  Lardner,  N.,  quoted, 
324;  Alford's  exegesis,  325;  ex- 
planation of  Alford's  extraordinary 
interpretation,  327  ;  fatal  flaw,  328  ; 
effect  of  new  light  on  Johannine 
problem,  329;  Tholuck's  exegesis, 
330 ;  Bishop  Ellicott  rejects  pre- 
vious interpretations,  331 ;  his  own, 
an  amazing  "  wresting  of  Scrip- 
ture," 333;  results  of  theory  of 
"  officiosum  niendacium,''^  334 ;  re- 
action through  new  spirit  of  the 
age,  335 ;  Christianity  like  an  old 
palimpsest,  336;  the  apocalypse, 
its  interpretation,  338. 

Clement,  epistle  of,  227. 

Comforter  (Paraclete),  not  mentioned 
by  Justin  Martyr,  240;  Irenseus 
first  to  mention  it,  and  quote  from 
Fourth  Gospel,  241;  of  Greek  ori- 
gin, traceable  to  Philo,  262 ;  doctrine 
of,  not  taught  in  the  synoptics,  263. 

"  Congregationalist,"  quoted,  354, 
note. 

Constantine,  devoted  to  worship  of 
sun-god,  25. 

Cross,  sign  of  the,  94 ;  origin,  pre- 
historic, 94 ;  f oimd  in  all  parts  of 
the  world,  96 ;  not  original  with 
Christianity,  96  ;  pre-Christian,  dif- 
ferent in  significance  from  Chris- 
tian, 97,  99 ;  early  form,  97  ;  Latin 
form,  later,  97 ;  made  by  Constan- 
tine the  great  symbol  of  Christianity, 
99  ;  gradual  blending  of  pre-Chris- 
tian and  Christian  conceptions,  100; 
illustrated  from  early  Christian  art, 
100 ;  history  of :  La  Religion  des 
Gaulois,  Bertrand,  102,  note. 

Crucifix,  origin  as  late  as  seventh 
century,  97. 

Dabk  Ages,  religion  of,  one  of  cre- 
dulity, fear,  and  cruelty,  279. 


INDEX 


373 


Darmesteter,     J.,    Avestan     scholar, 

quoted,  67. 
Darwin,  Charles,  "  Origin  of  Species  " 

(Oct.  1,  1859),  292. 
Defoe,  20. 

Emmons,  N.,  quoted,  25."*. 

Ethnic  religions,  traditional  view  of, 
as  essentially  evil  and  false,  result 
of  historical  ignorance,  182 ;  Paul's 
indictment  against,  equally  appli- 
cable to  a  degenerate  Christianity, 
182  ;  upward  progress  of,  183. 

Evolution,  physical  versus  historical, 
4 ;  illustrated  in  the  history  of  reli- 
gions, 5;  Christianity  no  exception, 
6 ;  law  of,  historical,  universal,  and 
without  break,  191. 

"Evolution  of  Trinitarianism "  criti- 
cised, 216-218,  360, 

Faibbaibn,  a.  M.,  19. 

Family,  the,  root  of  trinitarian  idea, 
22. 

Father,  origin  of  term  as  applied  to 
God,  23. 

Feminine  element  in  Trinity,  absence 
of,  in  Christian  dogma,  253 ;  Mary,  a 
true  human  mother,  253  ;  substitu- 
tion of  Holy  Spirit  for  Mary,  254 ; 
in  "  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews "  the 
Holy  Spirit  is  called  Christ's  mo- 
ther, 255 ;  why  the  feminine  ele- 
ment failed  to  prevail,  255  ;  loss  felt 
in  Christian  consciousness,  256. 

Fergusson,  J.,  "  History  of  Architec- 
ture," plan  of  triple  Etruscan  tem- 
ple, 118. 

Fourth  Gospel,  first  gives  theory  of 
Comforter  and  procession  from  the 
Father,  281 ;  Athanasius  rested  de- 
fense of  homoousian  trinity  prima- 
rily on,  262  ;  historicity  of,  262 ; 
whether  the  words  imputed  to 
Christ  concerning  Comforter  were 
spoken  by  him,  262.  (For  writer's 
judgment  on  authenticity  of,  see 
Appendix  A  on  "The  Johannine 
Problem,"  m  "  Evolution  of  Trini- 
terianism,"  264.) 

G-ATHAs,  oldest  Avestan  writing,  68 ; 
picture  of  Zoroaster,  68 ;  evolution 
of  supernatural  and  miraculous  ele- 


ments, 68 ;  remarkable  resemblances 
to  events  in  life  of  Christ,  68. 

Generation,  eternal,  developed  by  Plo- 
tinus,  emphasized  by  Origeu  and 
Athanasius,  252. 

Generation  idea,  behind  divine  triads, 
22 ;  fundamental  to  all  Ethnic  trini- 
ties, and  to  Christian  dogma,  251. 

Gibbon,  E.,  quoted,  90. 

Gnosticism,  Zoroastrian  in  origin,  77, 
88. 

God,'  the  earliest  conception  of,  33; 
can  exist  only  in  trinity,  so  held  by 
Plotinus  and  present  day  theolo- 
gians, 249. 

Greek  religion,  originally  polytheistic, 
92 ;  earlier  philosophy  of,  124;  new 
epoch  of  Socrates,  Plato,  and  Aris- 
totle, 124. 

Haecsel,  Eenst,  "  The  Kiddle  of  the 
Universe,"  350. 

"Hebrews,  Gospel  of,"  early  gos- 
pel, mostly  lost,  255  ;  quoted,  255. 

Heartley,  C.  A.,  Harmonia  Syrtibo- 
lica,  235. 

Holy  Spirit,  evolution  of,  as  third  Per- 
son of  Trinity,  222  ;  in  Old  Testa- 
ment always  adjunctive  or  adjecti- 
val, setting  forth  the  divine  activity, 
222;  Christ's  doctrme  of,  223  ;  Paul, 
Jewish  monotheist,  224;  used  the 
term  as  synonymous  with  God,  224; 
illustrated  tendency  towards  per- 
sonality, 225;  doxologies,  to  God 
only,  226 ;  view  of  i)ost- Apostolic 
Fathers,  226;  tendencies  towards 
evolution  of  H.  S. ,  as  third  person, 
along  three  lines  of  movement,  235 ; 
Justin  Martyr,  wavering  "view  of," 
239 ;  question  whether  H.  S.  is  a 
member  of  Trinity  or  creature  not 
settled  until  Nicene  age,  240  ;  Ori- 
gen  and  Arius  held  that  H.  S.  had  a 
beginning  in  time,  240;  procession 
of,  in  Christian  trinity,  253 ;  doc- 
trine of  H.  S.  as  third  person,  a  sort 
of  historical  necessity,  254;  "pro- 
cession "  does  not  appear  in  creeds 
until  fourth  century,  261 ;  why  pro- 
cession of  third  person  instead  of 
generation,  261 ;  found  in  Fourth 
Gospel,  361 ;  real  meaning  of  proces- 
sion, 265. 


374 


INDEX 


Homer,  use  of,  prohibited  by  Plato  in 

scheme  of  education,  92. 
Huss,  John,  violation  of  safe  conduct 

by  Council  of  Constance,  313. 

loNATiAN  Epistles,  seven  longer, 
largely  interpolated,  236;  seven 
shorter,  fewer  interpolations,  236; 
not  to  be  accepted  as  genuine,  236  ; 
results  of  comparison  of  two  ver- 
sions, 236,  237  ;  "  Comforter  "  and 
"Word"  found  in  longer,  but  not 
in  shorter,  238 ;  conclusive  testi- 
mony to  fluxive  character  of  early 
trinitarianism,  238. 

niad,  its  trinity,  103 ;  subordination- 
ism,  105  ;  mediational  character  of 
Athene,  105. 

lUingworth,  J.  K.,  quoted,  195  ;  treats 
Christian  dogmas  as  historical  facts, 
196. 

Incarnation,  two  classes  of  theory  of, 
51 ;  distinction  between  incarnation 
and  mediation  theories,  52 ;  stages 
of  evolution  of  dogma,  71. 

Inge,  W.  R.,  holds  that  Plotinus  was 
not  a  pantheist,  183  ;  apparent  mis- 
understanding of  phrase  "sameness 
and  otherness,"  184  ;  view  savors  of 
8abellianism,  185 ;  extracts  from 
the  Enneads  that  prove  Plotinus  a 
pantheist,  185 ;  misunderstanding 
of  term  exacrTos,  186 ;  says  "  Ploti- 
nus is  no  Buddhist,"  188. 

Irenseus,  first  to  give  a  creed  on  trin- 
itarian  basis,  241 ;  introduces  third 
stage  of  evolution  of  trinity,  242 ; 
marked  by  use  of  Fourth  Gospel, 
and  doctrine  of  Comforter,  242. 

"  Isis  and  Osiris,"  attributed  to  Plu- 
tarch, genuiueuesa  somewhat  doubt- 
ful, 137. 

Jesds  Cheist,  had  no  mediation  doc- 
trine, 60  ;  a  truly  historical  person- 
age, 192 ;  legends  of  miraculous 
birth  common  to  all  religious  epochs 
and  characters,  193 ;  such  legends 
misgrowths  of  a  credulous  and  un- 
critical age,  194 ;  J.  C,  not  the 
author  of  new  dogmas,  201 ;  or  of  a 
new  philosophy,  202 ;  or  of  a  new 
system  of  ethics,  203  ;  new  "  moral 
consciousness  "  of  character  of  God 


and  of  man's  relation  to  Him,  205  ; 
love,  the  substance  of  religion,  205; 
gospel  originally  given  in  Hebrew- 
Aramaic,  206;  divinizing  of  J.  C, 
the  liistorical  starting  point  of  Chris- 
tian trinity,  270  ;  and  the  theological 
centre  of  Christianity,  271  ;  fallacy 
of  apology  concerning  C.  as  histori- 
cal person,  272  ;  most  honored  when 
truth  told  of  him,  279. 
Jupiter  Capitolinus,  118. 

Kant,  E.,  quoted,  319. 

Krishna,  incarnation  of  Vishnu,  47 ; 
pre-Christian,  50;  differences  be- 
tween it  and  the  Christian  dog^ma, 


Lectistebnium,  118. 

Lightfoot,  Bishop,  on  Ignatian  Epis- 
tles, 236. 

Aoyos  (logos),  unfortunate  error  of 
Latin  version  of  N.  T.,  perpetuated 
in  English  versions,  128;  meaning 
of,  in  proem  of  Fourth  Gospel,  129 ; 
introduced  by  Heracleitus  into  phi- 
losophical language,  129  ;  Plato's  use 
of,  129  ;  how  logos  doctrine  is  traced 
to  Plato,  130 ;  Philo's  substitution 
of  Aoyo?  for  ^vxv  as  mediation  prin- 
ciple, 131 ;  logos  of  Fourth  Gospel, 
132. 

Lonsdale  and  Lee,  translators  of 
^neid,  quoted,  121. 

Maha-Bharata,  43. 

Marduk,  "first-bom,"  "only  begot- 
ten," "son  of  Ea,"  25. 

Mary,  Virgin,  doctrine  and  cultus  of, 
not  peculiar  to  Christianity,  71 ;  mo- 
ther of  Jesus,  114 ;  raised  in  Catho- 
lic theology  to  divine  rank,  as 
mediator,  114 ;  represents  the 
feminine  element  in  mediation,  114; 
"Queen  of  Heaven,"  116;  process 
of  evolution  of  dogma  of,  252  ;  pop- 
ularity of  cult  of,  in  the  Middle 
Ages,  257  ;  Catholic  effort  to  place 
M.  in  the  Trinity,  258;  at  Christ's 
side  in  paintings,  258 ;  cult  of  M. 
growing  among  Protestants,  259; 
how  defensible,  260 ;  only  possible 
direct  witness  of  virginity,  263. 

McCosh,  J.,  "  The  Supernatural  in  re- 


INDEX 


375 


lation  to  the  Natural,"  346 ;  repre- 
sents the  traditional  pre-Darwlnian 
view  of  nature  and  miracle,  346 ; 
accepts  full  historicity  of  Scrip- 
ture miracles,  347  ;  holds  that  the 
laws  of  nature  may  admit  of  excep- 
tions, 347;  with  Dr.  L.  Abbott, 
who  admits  a  single  exception, 
viz.,  the  miraculous  birth  of  Christ, 
348. 

Mediation  idea,  how  it  led  to  a  trinity, 
28 ;  tended  to  union  with  generation 
idea,  28;  difference  between  Mith- 
raic  and  Christian,  85. 

Mediator,  origin  of  idea  of,  26  ;  in  the 
Ethnic  trinities,  27  ;  in  Plato,  27 ; 
in  Vedic  hymn  to  Agni,  27  ;  Sosiosh 
as  Zoroastrian,  79 ;  /xeaiTTjs  (media- 
tor) introduced  by  Philo  into  Greek 
philosophy,  131 ;  made  the  keynote 
of  Paul's  Christology,  132  ;  also  of 
Epistle  to  Hebrews,  132. 

Michelet,  French  historian,  in  Bible 
de  V  Humanity  expresses  preference 
for  dualism,  89. 

Mill,  James,  view  of  dualism  as  theory 
of  universe,  89. 

Mills,  L.  H.,  quoted,  65. 

Mithra,  sim-god  in  Yedas,  81 ;  in 
Avesta,  creature  of  Ormuzd,  81 ;  in 
later  Zoroastrianism,  the  great  me- 
diator, 81 ;  Mithraic  triad,  82 ;  spread 
of  Mithraic  cult  in  Roman  world, 
82  ;  takes  place  of  Ormuzd  as  head 
of  Zoroastrian  trinity,  84;  temples 
of,  closed  by  Theodosius,  89 ;  Mith- 
raic cult,  overthrown  by  Christian 
emperors,  89,  90 ;  to  be  condemned, 
91. 

Mohammedanism,  had  a  mediation 
element,  60  ;  half-brother  to  Chris- 
tianity, 275. 

Monotheism,  as  the  primitive  revela- 
tion,? ;  of  Genesis  as  reformed  ver- 
sion of  older  polytheism,  78. 

Moses,  a  "  mediator,"  but  not  deified, 
59. 

Mythology,  essentially  a  system  of 
symbolism,  102;  product  of  imagi- 
nation, 102  ;  comparison  of  Greek 
with  other  forms  of,  103. 

New  Platonism,  begins  with  Philo 
and  Plutarch,  136 ;  teat  words ;  ideal- 


ism, mediation,  evolution,  136 ; 
change  from  Platonism  radical,  136. 

Nimbus,  or  aureole,  sign  of  saintliness 
or  divinity,  101 ;  connection  with 
sign  of  cross,  101. 

Numbers,  sacredness  of,  15 ;  8i)ecial 
sacredness  of  seven  and  three,  16; 
Pythagorean  idea  of  the  propitious 
character  of  odd  numbers,  16. 

Numenius,  midway  between  Plutarch 
and  Plotinus,  148;  "three  gods," 
148  ;  follower  of  Plato,  148  ;  signifi- 
cance of,  149  ;  generation  doctrine 
applied  to  whole  trinity,  150  ;  the 
world,  a  member  of  trinity,  150. 

Odyssey,  of  later  date  than  Hiad,  105; 
Athene  supplants  Here,  105 ;  Apollo 
becomes  member  of  trinity,  106  ; 
mediating  function  joined  to  sec- 
ond person,  106 ;  Odyssey  com- 
pared with  Iliad,  106  ;  its  theme, 
107 ;  chief  characters,  107  ;  Athene 
the  central  x>ersonage,  108 ;  O.  un- 
rivalled in  Ethnic  literature,  112; 
second  person  of  trinity  a  woman» 
113  ;  O.  compared  with  ^neid,  122; 
"Divine  Song"  of  Ethnic  Bible, 
123. 

Old  Testament,  ethical  teaching  of, 
310. 

Origen,  theory  of  mediatorship  be- 
tween God  and  Satan,  86,  88;  O. 
laid  foundation  of  completed  dogma 
of  Holy  Spirit  as  third  person,  242 ; 
regarded  H.  S.  as  a  creature,  243 ;  a 
monotheistic  trinitarian,  243. 

Pantheon,  pagan  temple,  dedicated  to 
"  Mary  and  all  the  saints,"  278. 

Paul,  Greek  training  of,  207  ;  founder 
of  Graeco-Roman  Christianity,  208  ; 
instrument  of  transfer  of  Christian- 
ity from  Semitic  to  Aryan  world, 
209;  mediation  doctrine  of,  de- 
fended against  view  of  Dr.  Lyman 
Abbott,  213 ;  not  an  Arian,  214  ;  did 
not  make  Christ  identical  with  God, 
214. 

Paulsen,  "  System  of  Ethics,"  quoted, 
319. 

Penelope,  painting  of,  at  Pompeii,  107. 

Persian  religion,  relation  to  Indian, 
64. 


376 


INDEX 


Petrie,  Flindera,  quoted,  210. 

Philo,  agency  in  developing  Logos 
doctrine,  130  ;  historical  founder  of 
logos  mediation  theology,  131 ;  in- 
troduced the  term  /u.e<7tr»js  (media- 
tor), 131 ;  not  a  trinitarian,  132  ;  his 
"  mediator  "  not  a  strict  person,  133. 

Plato,  called  God,  Father,  24 ;  quoted, 
62  ;  idealistic  dualist,  125  ;  media- 
tion doctrine,  126 ;  three  principles 
of  being,  126  ;  how  the  phenomenal 
world  is  produced,  126;  basis  of 
trinitarian  development,  127  ;  germ 
of  Logos  doctrine,  128 ;  eliminated 
fabulous  materials  from  philosophy, 
134 ;  trinitarian  germs,  166  ;  ethical 
views,  307 ;  opposed  use  of  Homer 
in  education,  307  ;  "  lie  in  words  " 
sometimes  necessary,  308 ;  influence 
of,  on  Christian  morals,  309. 

Pliny,  Elder,  quoted,  16. 

Plotinus,  historical  connection  with 
Numenius,  152 ;  differences  between 
them,  152 ;  influence  of  Plato  and 
Aristotle,  153  ;  philosophical  system 
essentially  original,  154 ;  Plotinian 
trinity  alone  the  work  of  a  single 
religious  genius,  154 ;  built  a  meta- 
physical trinity  on  Platonic  founda- 
tions, 155  ;  trinity  has  no  mytholo- 
gical background,  wholly  transcen- 
dental, no  divine  incarnation,  156  ; 
originality  of  genius,  157  ;  a  man 
of  faith,  157 ;  unique  power  as  a 
thinker,  157  ;  aim  practical  and  re- 
ligious, 159;  analysis  of  famous 
chapter,  V.  1,  in  the  Enneads,  160; 
souls  mimortal,  and  descended 
from  metaphysical  world,  160,  161 ; 
assumes  idealistic  dualism,  161  ; 
"  Sameness  and  Otherness,"  Plato's 
dualistic  key,  adopted,  164;  full 
evolution  of  a  trinity,  168  ;  peculiar 
double  character  of  third  hypostasis, 
172  ;  eternal  generation  of  trinity, 
173;  subordination  of  second  and 
third  hypostases,  173 ;  soul  homoou- 
sios  with  God,  174 ;  opposes  Gnos- 
tics, 174  ;  limits  trinitarian  evolu- 
tion to  three,  175 ;  three  hypostases 
not  personal  beings,  176  ;  "  other- 
ness "  the  bridge  from  transcendent 
to  material  world,  177  ;  moral  power 
of,  178. 


Plutarch,  quoted,  16 ;  styles  the  gods 
*'  saviours,"  74  ;  a  Platonist,  135  ; 
ruling  feature  of  his  system,  media- 
tion, prepared  way  for  Plotinus,  134; 
monistic  rather  than  dualistic,  136 ; 
new  philosophic  key,  evolution,  136 ; 
a  philosophical  eclectic,  138 ;  found 
in  the  Egyptian  Osiris  myth,  a  phil- 
osophic trinity,  138 ;  seeks  to  bring 
Plato's  three  principles  of  existence 
into  harmony  with  the  Egyptian 
triad,  Osiris,  Isis,  and  Horus,  142 ; 
affinity  not  real,  143 ;  opened  the 
path  from  theism  to  pantheism,  144 ; 
two  steps  towards  it,  145;  led  the 
way  to  the  trinity  of  Numeuius, 
148. 

Polycarp,  Epistle  of,  228. 

Polytheism,  traditional  view  of  its 
origin,  7  ;  Paul  most  influential  ex- 
poimder,  8  ;  historical  view  of  ori- 
gin, 8. 

Porphyry,  letter  to  Marcella,  180. 

Pythagoras,  held  in  great  repute  by 
Greek  Fathers,  248. 

Rawlinson,  G.,  on  Egyptian  trinities, 
15. 

Reconstruction,  in  theology,  341. 

Renan,  E.,  quoted,  90,  258. 

Revelation,  book  of,  Zoroastrian  ele- 
ments, 76. 

R^ville,  Albert,  Histoire  du  dogme  de 
la  divinitS  de  JSsus  Christ,  quoted, 
258. 

Rdville,  Jean,  La  Religion  sous  les 
Severes,  quoted,  88. 

Roman  religion,  appendix  to  Greek, 
116  ;  abstract  character,  117  ;  trin- 
ity, 117 ;  Capitoline  trinity,  of 
Etruscan  origin,  110 ;  comparison 
of  R.  trinity  with  Greek,  119. 

Sanday,  Professor,  suggestion  con- 
cerning origin  of  Apostles'  Creed, 
232. 

Satan,  Ahriman  of  A  vesta,  77  ;  de- 
velopment of  doctrine  of,  in  the 
church,  86;  Origen's  doctrine  of, 
drawn  indirectly  from  Zoroastrian- 
ism,  86. 

Sayce,  Professor,  quoted,  23. 

Schaff,  P.,  21 ;  quoted  on  Apostlea* 
Creed,  234. 


INDEX 


377 


Seneca,  quoted,  61 ;  "  Letters  of  Paul 
and  Seneca,"  spurious,  61. 

Servius,  commentator  on  Virgil, 
quoted,  118. 

Shedd,  W.  G.  T.,  19. 

Smith,  H.  B.,  quoted,  10. 

Soaiosh,  Zoroastrian  "saviour,"  73; 
mythical  being,  74 ;  supernatural 
son  of  Zoroaster,  74;  divine  mes- 
senger of  Ormuzd  to  raise  the  dead 
and  judge  the  world,  75. 

Strauss,  D.  F.,  quoted,  342. 

Symbolism,  fundamental  in  human 
thought  and  language,  94. 

Symbols,  of  cross,  94 ;  of  sun,  95  ; 
their  religious  character,  96 ;  found 
in  aU  parts  of  world,  96;  of  cross 
and  wheel,  98 ;  original  significance, 
98,99. 

Swastica,    Hindoo   gammated   cross, 


Talmud,  quoted,  224. 

Tauribolium,  rite  of  Mithraic  wor- 
ship, 83, 

"  Teaching  of  Twelve  Apostles,"  229 ; 
illustrates  inchoate  character  of 
trinitarian  idea,  231 ;  no  trace  of 
Pauline  mediatorship,  231 ;  Christ 
the  "  servant  of  God,"  231 ;  doxol- 
<^es  monotheistic,  231 :  baptismal 
formula,  first  in  trinitarian  form, 
231. 

Tennyson,  Alfred,  quoted,  62,  366; 
compared  with  Browning,  368. 

*'  Tetractys,"  Pythagorean  term, 
usual  form  of  oath,  246. 

Theologry,  the  new  problem  of,  340; 
two  sides  or  aspects,  341 ;  contrast 
with  problem  of  nineteenth  century, 
342  ;  "  Origin  of  Species,"  343  ; 
mortal  confiict  betweeen  law  of  im- 
interrupted  evolution  and  the  tra- 
ditional principle  of  supernatural 
intervention  by  special  creation 
and  miracle,  343  ;  victory  of  science 
and  historical  criticism,  344,  345 ; 
the  new  problem,  the  complete 
harmonizing  of  scientific,  historical 
and  religious  truth,  344;  downfall 
of  old  theology,  344 ;  the  new,  must 
be  scientific,  350 ;  other  aspect  of 
problem,  351 ;  effect  of  harmonizing 
of  science  and  religion  on  missionary 


movement,  351 ;  false  assumption 
that  Ethnic  religious  systems  are 
effete,  354,  note ;  problem  of  Chris- 
tianization  of  world  more  complex 
than  ordinarily  supposed,  355,  note ; 
great  Oriental  religions  cannot  be 
overthrown  by  theological  dogmas, 
356;  construction  of  new  theology 
simple  and  easy,  355,  366  ;  essential 
feature,  anthropological,  357 ;  de- 
velopment rapid,  358;  monism 
versus  dualism,  359 ;  new  theology 
not  metaphysical  but  moral,  360, 
361;  effect  of  Bushnell's  "Chris- 
tian Nurture,"  362 ;  grounds  for 
optimistic  hopefulness,  364 ;  Tenny- 
son as  representative  of  reUgioua 
temper  of  nineteenth  century,  366  ; 
Browning,  of  the  twentieth,  367 ; 
faith,  freedom  and  peace,  watch- 
words of  the  future,  368. 

Theophilus,  makes  "wisdom"  third 
person  in  place  of  H.  S.,  241. 

Three,  the  complete  or  perfect  num- 
ber, according  to  Aristotle,  16. 

"Transcript,"  Boston,  quoted,  354, 
note. 

Triad,  a  principle  of  nature  according 
to  Aristotle,  17. 

Triadal  idea,  244 ;  how  it  entered  into 
Christian  theology,  248. 

Triads,  widely  spread  over  the  world, 
7  ;  relation  to  Pantheism,  11. 

Trimurti,  Hindoo,  43;  history  of  its 
evolution,  43-45. 

Trinitarianism,  its  origin,  9 ;  a  half- 
way house  from  polytheism  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  divine  unity,  10; 
Zoroastrian,  why  comparatively  in- 
complete, 78. 

Trinities,  Ethnic,  comparatively  late 
in  development,  12 ;  historical  ori- 
gin unknown,  14 ;  result  of  a  long 
evolution,  14;  why  trinity  rather 
than  duad  or  quatemity,  14;  ex- 
planation of  rise  of,  22 ;  stage  to- 
ward pantheism,  29  ;  of  diverse  and 
independent  origin,  32  ;  result  from 
common  religious  instincts  and 
needs  of  human  nature,  32 ;  subject 
to  various  evolutionary  changes,  35  ; 
persistency  of  trinitarian  idea,  36; 
Ethnic  and  Christian,  alike  under 
the  common  law  of  historical  evo- 


378 


INDEX 


lutjon,  219,  243;  comparison  of 
internal  characteristics,  243;  in- 
ternal resemblances,  250 ;  mediation 
element,  the  closest  bond,  266; 
mediational  terms  characterize 
Ethnic  trinities  as  the  Christian 
dogma,  267  ;  French  critic  quoted, 
268 ;  internal  differences,  270  ;  in- 
flexibility of  Christian  dogma  due 
to  external  rather  than  internal 
causes,  274 ;  resemblances  radical, 
differences  superficial,  279. 
Trinity,  Christian  dogma  of,  supposed 
to  be  part  of  original  revelation  in 
Genesis,  12;  "social  trinity"  criti- 
cised, 19;  Vedic,  37;  Brahmanic, 
43;  Christian  dogma  derived  from 
Greek  philosophy,  219 ;  a  historical 
evolution,  222;  illustrated  in  case 
of  third  person,  222;  the  word 
trinity  (Greek,  rpias,  Latin,  trini- 
tas)  does  not  appear  till  Theophilus 
(A.  D.  168-188),  239. 

Ultssbs,  hero  of  Odyssey,  106. 

Vkdas,  37. 

Virgil,  quoted,  16 ;  Capitoline  trinity 
in  the  JCneid,  120;  fatalism,  121; 


JSneid    compared  with     Odyssey, 

122. 
Virgin  births,  in  Ethnic  religions,  71. 
Vishnu,  incarnation  of,  47. 

Watts,  Isaac,  character  of  hymns, 

318. 
Westcott,  Bishop,  quoted,  15. 
Wordsworth,  quoted,  369. 

Zend-Avesta,  dates  of,  67  ;  completed 
before  Christian  era,  69 ;  quoted, 
91. 

Zoroaster,  whether  a  myth,  or  histori- 
cal person,  51,  64 ;  a  practical  re- 
former, 65;  monotheist,  65;  life 
largely  legendary,  66;  explanation 
of  resemblances  between  lives  of 
Z.,  Buddha,  and  Christ,  70;  reli- 
gious teachings  of,  72 ;  closely  akin 
to  later  Judaism,  73 ;  historical  con- 
nection with  J.,  73. 

Zoroastrianism,  a  reaction  from  poly- 
theism, 64;  its  later  dualism,  an 
evolution,  65 ;  post-exilic  Jewish 
ideas  derived  from,  73 ;  three  stages 
in  development  of,  73 ;  historical 
connection  between  Z.  and  Chris- 
tian eschatology,  75. 


ElectrotyPed  and  printed  by  H.  O.  Houghton  &*  Co. 
Cambridge,  Mass.^  U.S.  A. 


Press  Notices  of  Dr.  Paine's  Previous  Work  : 

A   CRITICAL    HISTORY   OF 

THE   EVOLUTION    OF 

TRINITARIANISM 

AND  ITS  OUTCOME  IN  THE  NEW  CHRISTOLOGY 

Crown  8vOj  gilt  top,  $2.00 

There  have  been  few  works  on  theology  published  within 
recent  years  more  deserving  of  serious  attention  than  this 
volume  of  Professor  Paine's.  Its  significance  lies  in  the 
fact  that  it  is  an  expression  of  to-day's  theological  self- 
consciousness.  It  voices,  and  voices  well,  the  demands 
made  by  those  who  accept  the  results  of  unprejudiced  crit- 
ical processes  for  a  theology  resting,  not  on  assumptions,  but 
on  facts  derived  by  positive  methods. 

Professor  Paine  shows  himself  an  exceedingly  acute  and 
stimulating  expositor  of  the  development  of  doctrine.  It 
would  be  difficult  to  find  elsewhere  a  more  lucid  presenta- 
tion of  Athauasian  trinitarianism,  or  a  more  revolutionary 
exposition  of  Augustinianism.  —  Biblical  Worlds  Chicago. 

This  is  a  book  which  every  serious-minded  minister  should 
read  in  order  that  he  may  understand  the  spirit  of  the  his- 
torical school  of  theological  study.  Here  is  an  investigator 
who  deals  with  the  fundamentals,  and  whose  methods  and 
processes  strike  deep  into  the  very  foundations  of  the  dog- 
matic structure  of  Christianity. 

The  book  is  written  in  a  most  vigorous  and  pellucid  style. 
No  more  quickening,  absorbing,  and  stimulating  book  could 
be  taken  by  a  minister  for  occasional  reading  in  his  summer 
holidays.  —  Standard,  Chicago. 

Our  author  outdoes  the  most  extreme  Ritschlians  in  his 
view  of  the  needlessness  and  harmfulness  of  metaphysics  in 
theology.  Within  the  limits  of  a  brief  review  it  is  only 
possible  to  give  a  resume  of  a  book  which  raises  a  multitude 
of  fundamental  questions  in  history,  criticism,  and  philoso- 
phy. It  is  the  work  of  an  acute  and  reverent  mind,  and 
deserves  to  be  taken  seriously.  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  it  will 
not  fail  of  adequate  criticism.  It  is  a  frank  and  candid 
book  ;  let  it  be  frankly  and  candidly  met  and  answered.  — 
Prof.  George  B.  Stevens,  Yale  Divinity  School,  in  The 
London  Christian  World. 

A  noteworthy  book,  the  product  of  many  years  of  research, 
reflection,  and  teaching.  It  is  both  critical  and  constructive, 
and  is  a  highly  finished  fruit  of  the  naturalistic  school.  .  .  . 
The  author  has  many  striking  qualities  of  style  ;  he  is  al- 
ways lucid  and  vigorous.  —  Hartford  Seminary  Record. 


Marks  a  stage  far  in  advance  of  anything  that  has  come 
from  the  pen  of  a  Congregationalist.  In  style  the  book  is 
stimulating  from  its  lucidity,  accuracy,  and  force.  —  The 
Advance,  Chicago. 

This  is  a  profound  book,  written  by  a  master  in  one  of 
our  theological  schools,  —  the  result  of  thirty  years  of  con- 
tinuous and  critical  study  and  meditation.  —  Zion's  Herald, 
Boston. 

Professor  Paine  writes  with  the  deeply  sincere  convictions 
of  an  earnest  seeker  after  truth,  in  the  frankest  and  most 
straightforward  manner,  and  with  the  fullest  recognition 
of  the  prevalent  differences  of  opinion. 

As  an  unequivocal  expression  of  the  transitional  forms  of 
belief  of  the  modern  scientific  school  of  theology  it  will  take 
rank  as  a  very  noteworthy  volume.  —  The  Presbyterian, 
Nashville,  Tenn. 

It  is  immensely  significant  as  the  work  of  a  teacher  in  one 
of  our  most  conservative  theological  institutions.  It  is  the 
boldest  book  which  we  have  had  from  any  Orthodox  enclos- 
ure. —  The  Christian  Register,  Boston. 

A  radically  good  book.  .  .  .  Any  one  who  has  time  for  a 
careful  study  of  Christian  doctrines  will  find  this  book  hon- 
est, thorough,  and  —  shall  we  say  it  ? — free  from  that  pro- 
pensity to  lie  for  the  truth's  sake  which  characterizes  so 
large  a  part  of  theological  production.  The  key-note  of  the 
book  is  Faith  in  God  and  not  in  dogma.  —  Unity,  Chicago. 

This  volume  supplies  a  discussion  of  the  historical  devel- 
opment of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  which  for  clarity  and 
suggestiveness  has  not  been  surpassed  for  many  years  in  the 
field  of  American  theology.  The  strength  of  the  book  is  in 
its  historical  method.  It  is  a  comfort  to  read  one  who  hates 
a  fog  of  words.  —  The  Independent,  New  York. 

He  has  courage  to  come  out  and  tell  from  the  housetops 
what  other  scholars  have  been  muttering  among  themselves 
in  a  corner  in  all  our  leading  seminaries.  —  Springfield  Re- 
publican. 

Beyond  all  question  the  book  is,  as  one  of  its  hostile  crit- 
ics admits,  one  of  the  ablest  and  subtlest  presentations  of 
the  new  school  of  thinkers.  .  .  .  The  style  is  direct,  terse, 
and  clear  as  rock-water.  —  Dr.  Wm.  Matthews,  in  the 
Boston  Transcript. 

I  am  immensely  interested  in  the  book  as  res  gesta,  —  as 
a  part  of  contemporary  ecclesiastical  history,  and  a  very 
honorable  and  important  part.  ...  It  seems  to  me  that  one 
of  the  most  remarkable  things  about  your  very  remarkable 
book  is  the  way  the  world  (including  the  Church)  has  taken 
it.  —  Dr.  Leonard  W.  Bacon,  Norwich,  Conn. 

HOUGHTON,  MIFFLIN  AND   COMPANY 
Boston  and  New  York 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


AN  INITIAL  FINE  OF  25  CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  50  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY  AND  TO  $1.00  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVERDUE. 


J 


1947 


•30ec'52Rl 


W 


22^S69  2^- 


'"'^^1  0  195? /jj 


fsrtr- 


m. 


IS 


t.i^gtf'JD  ^g 


^I^H    4-64 -4  pi^ 


lUeb'64SM 


W 


lA 


^-^4^ 


^ 


^W 


o^p- 


LD  21-100m-12, '43  (8796s) 


/ 


To,  line 


101937 

r3 


^'i 


Ill 


